Public Uproar Over Controversial Charges
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has come under intense scrutiny for its initial decision to charge Hamit Coskun, a protester who burned a copy of the Koran outside the Turkish Consulate in London. The original charge, which referred to causing “harassment, alarm or distress against the religious institution of Islam,” was slammed by critics as a veiled reintroduction of blasphemy laws — long abolished in the UK.
Why the Case of Hamit Coskun Matters
Coskun’s case is more than just a courtroom drama. It sits at the intersection of freedom of speech, religious tolerance, and the legal boundaries of protest. Rights advocates say it could reshape the future of protest and religious discourse in Britain.
The Incident: What Happened in February 2025
Protest Outside Turkish Consulate
On a February morning in London, 50-year-old Hamit Coskun lit a copy of the Koran outside the Turkish Consulate in protest against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. He also invoked the name of Salwan Momika, the Iraqi refugee who burned a Koran in Sweden in 2023 before being assassinated. Coskun claimed the act was both a political protest and a symbolic act of solidarity.
Political Message or Provocation?
Supporters of Coskun argue that his act was a legally protected expression of political dissent. Detractors say the protest was an incitement to religious hatred. The debate quickly reached legal corridors and civil liberties organizations.
The Original Charges and the Backlash
“Intent to Cause Alarm Against the Religious Institution of Islam”
The CPS initially charged Coskun under the Public Order Act, with wording that suggested his actions were targeted against “the religious institution of Islam.” But legal experts were quick to highlight that this phrasing was legally flawed — Islam, as a religion, cannot be treated as a legal entity or victim under UK law.
Legal Experts Cry Foul
Akua Reindorf KC, a leading human rights barrister, told the National Secular Society the charge was “plainly defective.” She added that such wording dangerously tiptoes into the territory of criminalizing blasphemy — a law that was abolished in 2008 in England and Wales.
The Role of the National Secular Society
Letter to CPS Demanding Reconsideration
The National Secular Society (NSS) sent an urgent letter to the CPS, calling the charge legally unsound and accusing prosecutors of trying to enforce a “backdoor blasphemy law.”
Statement from NSS Chief Executive
Stephen Evans, CEO of the NSS, stated: “This prosecution is deeply troubling. While Coskun’s protest may offend, it does not justify criminal charges that prioritize religious sensitivities over free expression. We must not allow outdated concepts of blasphemy to creep back into law under new names.”
CPS Responds to Criticism
Charges Reworded Following Legal Scrutiny
Facing backlash, the CPS reviewed and subsequently reworded the charges. They removed the phrase “the religious institution of Islam” and admitted the language used in the initial charge was “incorrect.” The updated charge now focuses on public order without invoking religious institutions.
Read the full CPS update via The Telegraph.
Acknowledging the Error
The CPS has not dropped the case, but it emphasized that it seeks to uphold public order laws without infringing on legitimate political speech. A spokesperson said: “The revised charge aligns with established legal principles.”
What Legal Experts Say
“A Defective Charge” – Akua Reindorf KC Weighs In
Reindorf reiterated that the initial charge could have created a precedent for reviving blasphemy legislation under different terms. “We must not criminalize protest simply because it challenges dominant ideas, religious or otherwise,” she said.
The Blasphemy Law Debate Resurfaces
The case has sparked renewed interest in the question of religious privilege in law. Campaigners warn that allowing prosecutions based on offense to religious sentiments could undermine decades of progress toward a secular and free society.
Broader Free Speech Implications
Political Protest or Hate Crime?
While Coskun’s actions may be seen as provocative, supporters argue that he did not target individuals but rather expressed dissent against state and religious institutions. The key legal debate hinges on whether symbolic political acts that offend religious groups should be criminalized.
The Future of Religious Sensitivity Laws in the UK
Some lawmakers have suggested revisiting laws protecting against religious hate, but groups like the NSS argue that this must not equate to reintroducing any form of blasphemy law. The tension between safety, respect, and liberty is once again on the political table.
What Happens Next?
Coskun’s Court Date and Potential Outcomes
Coskun is set to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 28 May 2025. The court will determine whether the revised charges stand and if his protest constituted criminal behavior.
Implications for Prosecutorial Discretion
The case may also prompt the CPS to reconsider how it approaches politically sensitive incidents, especially those involving religion. Legal experts suggest new guidelines may be necessary to avoid overreach.
Conclusion
The rewriting of charges against Hamit Coskun marks a pivotal moment in the UK’s ongoing debate over free speech, religion, and protest. While the CPS has corrected course, the incident highlights the fine line between maintaining public order and stifling lawful dissent. As the case proceeds, all eyes will be on the courtroom — and on the legal principles that underpin a democratic society.
FAQs
Why were the original charges against Hamit Coskun so controversial?
The initial charge referenced “the religious institution of Islam,” which legal experts argued effectively reintroduced blasphemy law — abolished in the UK in 2008.
What did the CPS change in the charges?
The CPS admitted the wording was incorrect and reworded the charges to remove references to religious institutions, focusing instead on public order.
Is burning religious texts considered a crime in the UK?
Not by default. It may be considered offensive but is not illegal unless it can be shown to incite violence or disorder.
Who is supporting Coskun’s legal challenge?
The National Secular Society and various free speech advocates have spoken out against the prosecution.
Could this set a legal precedent?
Yes. This case could shape how UK law treats controversial protests involving religion, potentially impacting future prosecutions.
1 comment
[…] Hamit Coskun fined £240 after judge rules his actions were ‘highly provocative’ as free speech campaigners warn of ‘backdoor blasphemy laws’ […]
Comments are closed.