Keith Porteous Wood

Why won’t the Government get rid of this pesky threat to free speech that nobody wants?

By | Fri 6th July 2012 - 10:51 am

On Wednesday evening, Lord Mawhinney tabled an amendment (no.155) in the House of Lords to remove the word “insulting” from Section 5 of the Public Order Act to flush out the Government’s attitude on this catchall provision with a very low prosecution threshold that tarnishes our reputation for freedom of expression.

Section 5 has served to nobble those engaged in mischievous, but harmless, pranks, street preachers, and those pouring scorn on religion, but, worse, also those speaking truth to power. Of even greater concern is the chilling effect: what, for fear of prosecution, has not been said but should have been said?

It’s an issue that has managed to unite the Christian Institute and the National Secular Society, who have come together to form the Reform Section 5 campaign. The “Feel free to Insult Me” campaign was launched recently, headed up by former shadow Home Secretary David Davis. And supporting us are Lords Mackay, McDonald and Deer, respectively former Lord Chancellor, DPP and HM Inspector of Constabulary – and Rowan Atkinson, also worried about the risk to comedians.

Peter Tatchell narrowly avoided conviction under section 5 and spent hours in a cell for a peaceful protest at an extremist demonstration against the persecution of gay people by Islamists. They escaped any punishment while Tatchell spent hours in a police cell.

The latest person to have his collar felt by the police mentioning Section 5 was an 89 year old pensioner displaying an A4 sign in his window in Boston Lincolnshire saying simply that “religions are fairy stories for adults”. All it would need, apparently, would be for someone to make a complaint and poor old John Richards faces “being arrested and dealt with” for making his principles public.

Rupert Murdoch can count himself lucky that his comments about Scientology were made in America. A teenager displaying a poster bearing the word “cult” outside the Church of Scientology’s UK headquarters was arrested by the police. A young student was even arrested for opining that a policeman’s horse was gay.

A conviction under Section 5 only requires an insult to be likely to cause “harassment, alarm or distress”, not that it actually does so. Even with the change, Section 5 still protects us against threatening or abusive behaviour – these provisions are sufficient. And if violence is incited or a disturbance ensues, there are plenty of other laws that can be invoked. Only the Police Federation are opposing us removing this provision, giving “easy wins” for the police.

Let us know what you think and we will send comments to Lord McNally, (Leader of the LibDems in the Lords), and others relevant in the Party. You might also sound out your MP and let us know what response you get.

* Keith Porteous Wood has been the pro bono Researcher for Lord Avebury for the last ten years and Director of the National Secular Society for the last fifteen. Apart from Westminster and Whitehall, this takes him to Edinburgh and Brussels Parliaments, the Council of Europe in Strasbourg and the UN in Geneva

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in News, Parliament and The Independent View.
Advert

11 Comments

  • Richard Dean 7th Jul '12 - 3:02pm

    There is a difference between arrest and conviction, and there is the possibility of suing for wrongful arrest – a thing that every wrongfully arrested citizen should consider as a duty since it helps the police to learn.

    I cannot see how calling a policeman’s horse “gay” comes under Section 5, as likely to cause “harrassment, alarm, or distress”. I would have found it hilarious! Did this incident result in the student being convicted under Section 5?

  • Richard Dean 7th Jul '12 - 3:07pm

    … although I suppose that it could have alarmed the PC rider by suggesting the student might be working himself or herself up into a frenzy of anti-LBGT violence against the horse.

  • Julian Tisi 8th Jul '12 - 10:06pm

    An excellent post, Keith. And one that I hope most liberals can rally round. While I respect the idea that we wish to protect the vulnerable, there are plenty of other laws that protect people without this “catch-all” clause that allows police to arrest pretty much anyone.

    More importantly, there is an important principle at stake here. Freedom of opinion and freedom to express that opinion are not just nice in theory. In practice they are absolutely essential if we are to protect ourselves against dangerous cults, preachers of hate and the like. Why should such people be protected from opponents expressing their disagreement with them peacefully? What if no-one stands up to these people until someone gets hurt?

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Michael BG
    Simon R, “it’s not at all clear to me how deliberately making wealthy people poorer in the name of equality can improve anything. That seems to me ver...
  • Thelma Davies
    Why should American Jewish students attending Harvard need to call out the actions of the Israeli government? The three university presidents who gave testimony...
  • Daniel Stylianou
    I’m always astounded by how many people suddenly develop law degrees when they read a summary of a judgement they don’t like. Was the decision of the SC ...
  • Joseph Bourke
    In reality there is not much in the way of British consumer goods left to buy ...
  • Ricky Treadwell
    Do we want to give this ground to Labour? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/apr/08/rachel-reeves-rejects-calls-buy-british-campaign-us-tariffs I refuse...