Skip to content
General-news — Secularism — Blasphemy law — Image of the week — Free speech — Politics — Blasphemy

Conviction of Coskun under Islamic blasphemy regulations confirmed

Undermining the freedom of speech is hazardous, according to National Secular Society CEO Stephen Evans, who argues such a move would be detrimental to open expression.

,   and  ASMedia
3 min read
Privilege to Remain Unoffended Deemed a Fatal Blow to Free Speech, Argument by National Secular...
Privilege to Remain Unoffended Deemed a Fatal Blow to Free Speech, Argument by National Secular Society CEO Stephen Evans

Conviction of Coskun under Islamic blasphemy regulations confirmed

In the heart of the City, a 50-year-old chap named Hamit Coskun made headlines for his questionable actions. Burning a Quran outside the Turkish consulate, he intended it as a political statement against the "Erdogan's Islamist government" and Islam in general, a faith he holds in low regard.

Coskun's background adds a layer of complexity to his actions. An Armenian-Kurd raised in Turkey, he and his family have endured persecution with a grim history of bloodshed from Islamists, including family members who perished in the Armenian Genocide of 1915.

As Coskun peacefully executed his one-man protest, another individual stepped forward from the surrounding buildings, outraged at the situation. Cursing him and brandishing a weapon, he threatened, "Burning the Quran? It's my religion! You don't burn the Quran!"

The CPS seized on this violent response to justify Coskun's prosecution, arguing that public order was put at risk. But is this really a case of victim blaming, or is it the blurred lines between speech and violence driving this unwarranted conviction?

If public order laws become the justification for curbing our collective right to freedom of speech and expression based on the sensitive nature of others, are we veering towards an authoritarian regime that stifles dissent?

The Public Order Act gives the police extraordinary power. Any behavior deemed "likely" to cause a stir, distress, or annoyance can be penalized. This has resulted in the application of public order laws in place of blasphemy laws. It jeopardizes freedom of expression by promoting a "heckler's veto" system that empowers violent responses to suppress unpopular opinions.

In a chilling echo of the past, the concept of "Islamophobia" has skewed the crucial distinction between prejudice or hate towards Muslims as individuals and robust criticism of Islam or Islamism as ideologies.

Coskun has repeatedly clarified that his issue isn't with Muslims but radical Islam. However, a few casual remarks during a police interview configured the judge's thinking that his protest was driven by deep-seated hatred for Islam and its followers.

With stifling echoes from times past, the specter of blasphemy laws creeps closer. Just last year, MP Tahir Ali demanded "measures" to restrict the desecration of religious texts. The government boldly refused, but the daring application of public order laws in the Coskun case suggests we may be posturing perilously close to the edge of reintroducing blasphemy.

Scrutinizing the initial charge against Coskun, one might argue that it was absurd, a non-crime, effectively treating Islam as a protected entity, tantamount to a form of blasphemy law. Thankfully, it was withdrawn after the National Secular Society intervened with legal advice.

We, at the freethinker, stand firm against book-burning, whatever the content. However, provocative and offensive as it may be, destroying a Quran in public should not equate to a criminal act. The outcome of this case reflects a troubling capitulation to Islamic blasphemy codes.

References:

  1. The National Secular Society: A controversial Quran burning case highlights the need for reform
  2. Humanists UK: Man prosecuted for burning Quran outside Turkish consulate found guilty of religiously aggravated public order offence
  3. Alliance Defending Freedom: UK courts urged to recognize 'Islamic blasphemy' as a dangerous threat to free speech, religious freedom
  4. Index on Censorship: UK police oppose 'blasphemy' claim as they raid London art gallery

Hamit Coskun's controversial act of burning a Quran has sparked discussions about free speech and the blurred lines between speech and violence. If public order laws lead to restricting free speech based on sensitivity, it could pave the way for an authoritarian regime. The Coskun case raises concerns about the possible reintroduction of blasphemy laws, with Islamic blasphemy codes potentially influencing the outcome. The National Secular Society intervened in the case, preventing the initial absurd charge against Coskun, often treated as a protected entity, analogous to a form of blasphemy law.

Read also:

Related

Latest