Freedom of Expression, Minorities and State Protection
| Author | Zia Akhtar |
| Pages | 41-57 |
41
THOUGHT PIECE
'Thought Pieces' are papers which draw on the author's personal knowledge and
experience to offer stimulating and thought provoking ideas relevant to the aims of the
Journal. The ideas are located in an academic, research, and/or practice context and all
papers are peer reviewed. Responses to them, or new thought pieces are always welcome
and should be submitted to the Journal in the normal way.
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, MINORITIES AND STATE
PROTECTION
Zia Akhtar, Grays Inn
Abstract The recent acquittal of Dutch MP Geert Wilder on a charge of inciting racial
hatred, banning of veils in France, and the burning of the Koran in the US, are part of a
sequence of criminalisation of Muslims. Iconographic figures of Muslims were demonised,
beginning with the publicising of libellous cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, initially in
Denmark and then much of Europe, depicting him as a terrorist. There are international
conventions that prohibit the discrimination of communities based on their religious
beliefs. In the UK, the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 has extended the ambit of the
Public Order Act 1986 to cover religious harassment. However, the failed prosecutions
under the statute show that it does not extend to vilification of the belief and only
addresses the people who practice the creed. The findings of researchers in the UK and US
show that the fundamental rights in granting freedom of expression vary according to the
constitutions but their expression needs to be balanced with the effect on the rights of a
minority. This paper presents an argument that the commission of hate crimes shoul d
include a grossly offensive insult to a religious faith for the improved protection of
minorities from racist attack, even if the intention of the perpetrator is to invite
contemporary discussion.
Keywords Libelous cartoons; Hate crimes; Human Rights; Public Order Act 1986; Racial
Introduction
In the last two decades, western literature in both print and electronic forms has offended
the people of Muslim faith by the use of imagery and satire. The methodologies
British Journal of Community Justice
©2012 Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield
ISSN 1475-
0279
Vol. 10(1): 41-57
Akhtar
42
employed to denigrate holy figures have caused court actions in European cities and
disturbances on the streets of the Islamic world. This has brought the conflict between
the occident and the orient into sharp relief by the defamation of the sacred canon of
religion. It has been carried out in the climate of xenophobia and with legislation enacted
against those suspected of terrorism on the European mainland. The issue of victimisation
begs the question if the objectifying of symbols in dispa raging a value system can be
punished, or allowed as a valid debate.
The exercise of the right of freedom of expression carries with it duties and responsibilities
incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) in the UK. The state can place this in
abeyance if restrictions are considered to be necessary in the interests of national security
and public safety.1 There is another contention surro unding the issue of further
prejudicing the majority against the minority by the debasement of their sacred canons. It
is particularly alienating for the minority when it is narrowly defined as a religious group,
and not grouped together as a racial category.
There has been controversy in recent times about the lack of prosecutions in cases where
the esteemed icons of the Muslim faith have been degraded. It was initiated with the
illustrations in a Danish newspaper that castigated the Prophet Muhammad as a terrorist.
Subsequently, there was the incineration of Koranic texts in the US that did not lead to
criminal charges. The Dutch MP Geert Wilder was acquitted of inciting racial hatred when
he compared the tenets in the holy book of Muslims to the Nazi ideology, and recently the
wearing of veils has been proscribed in France. These have been deemed by their critics as
propaganda against Islam by the West.
The treatment of the Islamic faith as a vehicle for contempt and ridicule has caused a
victim co mplex a mongst the Muslims. They are the minority community in Europe who
have been suspected of dubious loyalty in the current 'war on terror' and the policy of
liberal interventionism in their countries o f origin. This has caused them to seek
protection in laws against cynical and satirical excess in the European countries in which
they have settled. In the UK, the concerns of Muslims have surfaced since the 'Satanic
Verses' was published by Penguin in 1989. This book was seen to be defamatory of the
Prophet Muhammad and there was civil agitation in the UK and abroad to have it pulped.
The need was felt that a law should be promulgated that could protect Muslims and other
religious minorities. This came with the enactment of the Racial and Religious Hatred Act
2006, which extended the Public Order Act (POA) 1986's ambit to cover religiously
aggravated harassment.
This article illustrates the controversy caused by the impact of the Danish cartoons. They
were in the view of Muslims malicious by their depiction of the Prophet Muhammad as a
1 Article 10 of the UK Human Rights Act states: 'Everyone has the right to freedom of expression.
This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and
ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.'
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/content
To continue reading
Request your trial