A man who burned a Koran outside the Turkish consulate in London has won an appeal against his conviction.
Hamit Coskun was found guilty earlier this year of a religiously aggravated public order offence after shouting “f*** Islam” while holding the flaming religious text aloft outside the Turkish consulate in England’s capital city in February.
Before travelling to London, the 51-year-old wrote posts on social media detailing his plan and saying it was to “protest the Islamist government” of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom he claimed “has made Turkey a base for radical Islamists and is trying to establish a Sharia regime”, the court previously heard.
With the backing of campaigners, Coskun won an appeal against his conviction at Southwark Crown Court today.
Hamit Coskun was earlier found guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offence
|
PA
Turkey-born Coskun, who is half-Kurdish and half-Armenian and lives in England, had his legal case funded by the National Secular Society (NSS) and the Free Speech Union (FSU).
His appeal case was also attended this week by shadow justice secretary, Robert Jenrick, who said while he did not agree with what Coskun had done, “I don’t believe it’s a crime”.
Campaigners had argued the prosecution and conviction was akin to blasphemy being reintroduced “by the back door, inadvertently, by our court service”.
Reacting to the news of the successful conviction appeal, Mr Jenrick labelled it an “important victory for free speech”.
Robert Jenrick said the appeal success was an ‘important victory for free speech’
|
PA
He wrote to X: “Hamit Coskun has been cleared. Good.
“I didn’t like what Mr Coskun did; burning a religious text was not pleasant. But it was also never criminal.
“So, this is an important victory for free speech. Parliament voted to abolish blasphemy laws 20 years ago.
“It was disgraceful that the authorities attempted to re-create them by the back door.”
Hamit Coskun said he had come to England to “be able to speak freely about the dangers of radical Islam” and is now “reassured” that he is “free to educate the British public about my beliefs”.
In a statement following the ruling, he said: “I want to thank the Free Speech Union, the National Secular Society, all my lawyers, the MPs who have supported me and the judges for the decision today.
Turkey-born Hamit Coskun has won an appeal against his conviction
|
PA“I came to England, having been persecuted in Turkey, to be able to speak freely about the dangers of radical Islam.
“I am reassured that — despite many troubling developments — I will now be free to educate the British public about my beliefs.”
The FSU said the ruling sends a message that “anti-religious protests, however offensive to true believers, must be tolerated”.
Union Director Lord Toby Young of Acton said: “We’re delighted.
“Had the verdict been allowed to stand it would have sent a message to religious fundamentalists up and down the country that all they need to do to enforce their blasphemy codes is to violently attack the blasphemer, thereby making him or her guilty of having caused public disorder.
“Instead, the Crown Court has sent the opposite message – that anti-religious protests, however offensive to true believers, must be tolerated.”
Coskun’s trial in June saw him convicted at Westminster Magistrates’ Court of a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly behaviour “within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress”, motivated by “hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam”.
Referring to his conduct outside the Turkish consulate earlier this year, Mr Justice Bennathan told Southwark Crown Court: “This was clearly political speech or conduct.
“Insulting conduct is not sufficient and we should be careful not to read down the words we are considering.”
Hamit Coskun said he is ‘reassured’ that he is ‘free to educate the British public about my beliefs’ following his appeal victory
|
PA
Mr Justice Bennathan also mentioned the fact that Coskun’s actions were not directed at a person or people in particular.
“We live in a liberal democracy,” the judge continued.
“One of the precious rights that affords us is to express our own views and read, hear and consider ideas without the state intervening to stop us doing so.
“The price we pay for that is having to allow others to exercise the same rights, even if that upsets, offends or shocks us.”
Campaign group, the National Secular Society said the judgment was “an important victory for freedom of expression”, describing Coskun’s actions as a “lawful act of political dissent”.