"Man's conviction for burning Qur’an in London overturned on appeal"

A man who was penalized for burning a Qur’an outside the Turkish diplomatic mission in London has successfully appealed his conviction after a judge upheld his "right to offend."

Hamit Coskun was initially found guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offense in June following an incident in February, during which he shouted inflammatory remarks while setting fire to the religious text.

Westminster magistrates court had ruled that Coskun’s conduct was partly driven by animosity toward Muslims, based on statements he made during police questioning. Coskun, however, maintained that his criticisms were directed at the religion itself, not its adherents.

With support from the Free Speech Union and the National Secular Society, Coskun’s conviction was overturned by Southwark crown court on Friday.

Mr. Justice Bennathan stated that while destroying a Qur’an may deeply distress many Muslims, freedom of expression "must encompass the right to voice opinions that may offend, shock, or disturb."

Coskun, who is of Kurdish and Armenian descent, was born in Turkey and resides in England.

After the ruling, Coskun said he came to England to "express his concerns about extremist ideology without restraint" and felt reassured he could continue to share his perspective publicly.

Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, who attended the hearing, said he disagreed with burning the Qur’an but maintained that it should not be treated as a criminal act.

He and other critics argued that the original prosecution could be seen as a de facto restoration of blasphemy laws, which were abolished in England and Wales in 2008 and in Scotland in 2021.

Toby Young of the Free Speech Union called the decision a clear signal that protests criticizing religion—no matter how controversial—must be permitted.

He warned that upholding the original verdict might have emboldened religious hardliners to suppress dissenting views through intimidation.

The National Secular Society welcomed the judgment as a crucial defense of free expression, framing Coskun’s actions as a "legitimate political protest."

A representative from Humanists UK expressed relief over the overturned conviction, though they distanced themselves from Coskun’s anti-Muslim sentiments.

They noted concerns that weaknesses in the law could undermine free speech protections and vowed to continue advocating for robust expression rights, limited only to prevent direct harm.