Can CPS Reverse the Acquittal of the Quran-Burner?

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has recently lost a significant High Court appeal regarding the acquittal of Hamit Coskun, a man who set fire to a Quran outside the Turkish consulate in London. This ruling raises important questions about the boundaries of free speech and the legal implications of actions deemed offensive to religious beliefs.

Last updated: 19 October 2023 (BST)

What’s happening now

The High Court dismissed an appeal from the CPS that sought to challenge the acquittal of Hamit Coskun. Coskun's initial conviction for a religiously aggravated public order offence was overturned by Mr Justice Bennathan at Southwark Crown Court in October 2022. The CPS's bid to reconsider this decision was rejected on the grounds that the original court had not overlooked any significant factors in its ruling. This outcome has been met with strong reactions, especially from free speech advocates who view the CPS's actions as a misguided attempt to impose restrictions on lawful expression.

Key takeaways

The CPS's appeal against Hamit Coskun's acquittal has been dismissed by the High Court.
The initial conviction for burning the Quran was overturned on the basis of free speech rights.
There have been calls for the resignation of the Director of Public Prosecutions due to this "humiliating defeat" for the CPS.

Timeline: how we got here

The events leading to the High Court's decision unfolded as follows:

February 2022: Hamit Coskun protests outside the Turkish consulate in London, burning a Quran and making inflammatory statements.
June 2022: Coskun is convicted of a religiously aggravated public order offence.
October 2022: Mr Justice Bennathan overturns Coskun's conviction, ruling that his actions did not constitute disorderly behaviour.
February 2023: The CPS appeals the acquittal.
October 2023: The High Court dismisses the CPS's appeal, affirming that the initial ruling was sound.

What’s new vs what’s known

New today/this week

The High Court's recent dismissal of the CPS's appeal is the latest development, reinforcing the legal stance that burning a religious text, when accompanied by speech, falls under the protection of free expression. This decision highlights the judiciary's commitment to upholding free speech principles, even when the content may be considered deeply offensive to some.

What was already established

Previously, Coskun's conviction had been overturned based on arguments that his actions did not amount to disorderly conduct, as determined by Mr Justice Bennathan. The court found that the CPS had not sufficiently demonstrated that Coskun's behaviour was likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress, which are necessary components for a public order offence under UK law.

Impact for the UK

Consumers and households

The implications of this case extend beyond legal boundaries, affecting societal norms around free expression and religious sensitivity. While freedom of speech is a fundamental right, the reactions to protests like Coskun's can create an atmosphere of tension, especially among communities sensitive to perceived attacks on their beliefs.

Businesses and jobs

Businesses in areas where such protests occur may face challenges related to public perception and safety. Additionally, employers may need to navigate the complex landscape of employee expression when it intersects with potential public backlash.

Policy and regulation

This case may prompt discussions in UK Parliament about the current state of laws regarding public order offences and how they relate to expressions of free speech. It raises questions about whether there needs to be clearer guidelines defining the balance between free expression and respect for religious sentiments.

Numbers that matter

51: Age of Hamit Coskun, the individual at the centre of this case.
£100,000+: Estimated costs incurred by the CPS in pursuing the appeal.
0: The number of blasphemy laws currently in effect in the UK, as they were abolished 18 years ago.
1: The number of attacks on Coskun during his protest, highlighting the risks associated with such demonstrations.

Definitions and jargon buster

Crown Prosecution Service (CPS): The principal public agency responsible for prosecuting criminal cases in England and Wales.
Public order offence: A crime that disrupts public peace or safety, which can include riot, violent protest, and other disturbances.
Blasphemy: The act of insulting or showing contempt for God or sacred things, which is not currently a prosecutable offence in the UK.

How to think about the next steps

Near term (0–4 weeks)

In the immediate future, the CPS is likely to conduct a thorough review of the High Court's ruling and reassess its approach to similar cases. This may involve an internal evaluation of how public order offences are prosecuted, particularly in relation to free speech.

Medium term (1–6 months)

Over the coming months, there could be broader discussions within the legal system and civil society about the implications of this ruling on public protests and expressions of dissent. Watch for potential debates in Parliament regarding the need for clearer laws around public order offences.

Signals to watch

Future CPS statements regarding the handling of public order offences.
Any proposed legislative changes related to free speech and public demonstrations.
Public reactions to protests that may challenge existing norms around religious sensitivity.

Practical guidance

Do

Stay informed about changes in laws regarding free speech and public order offences.
Recognise the importance of balancing free expression with respect for differing beliefs.

Don’t

Don't engage in behaviour that could lead to public disorder without understanding the legal implications.
Don’t dismiss the significance of public responses to controversial expressions of free speech.

Checklist

Understand the legal framework surrounding public order offences.
Be aware of the potential risks associated with public protests.
Consider the social implications of actions that may offend others.
Stay updated on the outcomes of high-profile legal cases related to free speech.

Risks, caveats, and uncertainties

While the High Court's ruling reinforces free speech rights, it also underscores the complexities involved in balancing these rights with societal norms and religious sensitivities. The CPS's approach to prosecuting such cases may still evolve, and future legal challenges could further shape the landscape of free expression in the UK.

Bottom line

The High Court's decision not only vindicates Hamit Coskun but also signals a critical moment for free speech in the UK. It serves as a reminder that while freedom of expression is a cherished right, it can elicit strong reactions and requires careful navigation to uphold both legal standards and societal harmony.

FAQs

What was Hamit Coskun charged with?

Hamit Coskun was initially charged with a religiously aggravated public order offence for burning a Quran and making inflammatory statements outside the Turkish consulate.

Why did the CPS appeal the High Court's decision?

The CPS appealed the High Court's decision on the grounds that it believed Mr Justice Bennathan wrongly concluded that Coskun's behaviour was not disorderly.

What does this ruling mean for free speech in the UK?

This ruling reinforces the principle that offensive speech, including protests, is protected under free speech laws, as long as it does not incite violence or cause public disorder.