Claims that the UK is within the midst of a free speech disaster and suffers from a “two-tier” justice system are unfounded, however the latest arrest of comic/author Graham Linehan at Heathrow Airport by armed law enforcement officials has offered ammunition for these intent on pushing this agenda.
Linehan is a extremely profitable Irish comedy author, identified amongst different issues for Father Ted and the IT Crowd. In recent times he has turn out to be well-known for his gender vital views. On 1 September he was arrested at Heathrow Airport in relation to a few tweets he had posted on X earlier within the 12 months that had been stated to “incite violence”. The tweets in query are understood to be:
“If a trans-identified male is in a female-only house, he’s committing a violent, abusive act. Make a scene, name the cops and if all else fails, punch him within the balls.”
{A photograph} of trans-rights protest with the remark “a photograph you may scent“; and
A follow-up put up, “I hate them. Misogynists and homophobes. F*** em.”
Many would agree with Linehan’s views. Many would disagree and/or discover them offensive. Many would discover them unnecessarily provocative. Many would haven’t any curiosity.
Understandably the arrest attracted appreciable criticism.
On 3 September, Well being Secretary Wes Streeting got here to the defence of the police saying that they had been solely implementing on-line speech legal guidelines, and that these legal guidelines wanted reviewing. This was echoed by Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley:
“…officers concerned within the arrest had affordable grounds to consider an offence had been dedicated….
I don’t consider we ought to be policing poisonous tradition wars debates and officers are at present in an unattainable place…
…Larger readability and customary sense would allow us to restrict the assets we dedicate to tackling on-line statements to these circumstances creating actual threats in the actual world.”
It’s obscure whether or not Mr Streeting and Sir Mark had been being naïve or opportunistic, however they each have it the incorrect approach spherical. Communication offences are typically clearly worded and strike the precise steadiness between defending freedom of expression and public order.
Free speech has a excessive diploma of safety. It isn’t a felony offence to specific controversial and even offensive opinions within the UK. Linehan’s arrest was a results of poor policing, not dangerous regulation.
When confronted with allegations of this nature, it’s incumbent on the police to grasp what would possibly represent a critical incitement to violence and what’s clearly not meant actually. This implies police want ample coaching and/or the Crown Prosecution Service’s attorneys have to be consulted at an early stage – ideally earlier than a suspect is accused of a criminal offense.
Even with out coaching, the widespread sense that Sir Mark refers to might and will have been exercised by his officers. It’s appropriate that they aren’t anticipated to police tradition wars: they’re anticipated to establish critical incitements of violence.
None of that is new; it shouldn’t be difficult. The laws was launched by the Thatcher authorities within the Nineteen Eighties. Folks have been tweeting since 2006. The temperature of the tradition wars could have risen just lately, however incitement to violence shouldn’t be a novel idea.
In 2010 Paul Chambers printed a joke tweet in response to chilly climate forcing the closure of his native airport: “Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You’ve acquired every week and a bit to get your shit collectively in any other case I’m blowing the airport sky excessive!!”. A poor policing resolution led to Chambers being arrested by anti-terror police. In Chambers v Director of Public Prosecutions [2012] EWHC 2157 (Admin) the Lord Chief Justice was stated to have laughed when Chambers’ barrister requested whether or not Shakespeare would have been prosecuted if he had tweeted his line “The very first thing we do, let’s kill all of the attorneys“. The common sense resolution in Chambers has offered a excessive charging normal ever since and in apply, prosecutions regarding tweets have been uncommon.
No matter one thinks about his views or methodology, Linehan was clearly not inciting violence. His case could be contrasted to that of Lucy Connolly. On the top of anti-immigration riots in 2024, Connolly tweeted, “Mass deportation now. Set hearth to all of the fucking motels stuffed with the bastards for all I care. When you are at it, take the treacherous authorities and politicians with them. I really feel bodily sick figuring out what these households will now should endure. If that makes me racist, so be it”. It is very important stress that Connolly pleaded responsible on the understanding that she supposed to incite critical violence. Additional, the Crown argued – and Connolly didn’t dispute – that her case fell throughout the ‘excessive culpability’ sentencing bracket as a result of what she had written inspired exercise which threatened or endangered life. Regardless of all this, sure folks (a lot of whom ought to know higher) have sought to painting Connolly as a political prisoner and a sufferer of North Korean fashion censorship. Mockingly a lot of this criticism has come from the US, which is witnessing arguably probably the most critical suppression of free speech in its constitutional historical past.
A civilised nation permits offensive speech, however should condemn incitements of violence to keep away from civil dysfunction. Simply in the identical approach that critical incitements of violence ought to be prosecuted, communications which can be merely offensive or provocative should not be. It’s incumbent on these throughout the political spectrum and cultural divides to recognise this clear distinction, no matter which facet of any specific debate the missive was fired from.
Linehan’s arrest, and the irresponsible feedback of Mr Streeting and Sir Mark, are a PR catastrophe for these looking for to defend the UK’s report of free speech. Placing apart whether or not there ought to have been any investigation in any respect, it’s not clear why anybody must be arrested for an allegation of this nature, not to mention by armed law enforcement officials, the place there doesn’t appear to be any doubt that the suspect despatched the communication in query. An arrest ought to solely happen the place it’s vital, usually to safe proof, the place a suspect shouldn’t be cooperating and/or to forestall hurt to themselves or others. Ordinarily, a suspect ought to be invited to attend an interview below warning voluntarily, within the first occasion. That is earlier than one considers whether or not any suspicion an offence had been dedicated may very well be stated to be affordable – additionally a requirement for an arrest. It isn’t shocking to listen to that Linehan intends to sue the Metropolitan Police.
The arrest of Linehan provides dangerous actors one thing concrete to level to, however the regulation doesn’t want altering – it simply must be sensibly enforced.
This put up initially appeared on the Brett Wilson Media and Communications Legislation Weblog and is reproduced with permission and thanks
