Blasphemy trial to take place in the UK on Wednesday

On Wednesday, a man is to stand trial after burning a Quran outside the Turkish Embassy in London reportedly in protest of the President of Turkey. Humanists UK has warned that if the prosecution is successful, and if the case is reported, it will effectively re-establish the crime of blasphemy in England and Wales, 17 years after its abolition.

In February, the defendant pleaded not guilty to a charge that was originally reported as: ‘intent to cause against religious institution [sic] of Islam, harassment, alarm or distress’. Humanists UK wrote to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to point out that the law doesn’t protect any institution – religious or secular – from harassment. The CPS then substituted the charge for one of likely causing harassment, alarm, or distress to individuals.

How are blasphemy laws attempting a comeback?

The part of the Public Order Act that deals with religious hatred clearly states that: 

‘Nothing in this Part [the religious hatred part of the Act] shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents…’

This part of the Act was carefully designed to avoid the law being used for claims of blasphemy. It draws a clear line between actions and expressions of religious hatred against individuals based on their religion – which are criminal; and actions and expressions that are critical, even abusive, of religious doctrines but do not target individuals – which are not to be prohibited or restricted. 

However, it appears prosecutors have instead charged him with ‘using threatening or abusive words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or displaying any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening or abusive, within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby,’ under a section of the Act that is not in the religious hatred part. This other section therefore doesn’t fall under the above-quoted free speech protection. This has the effect of circumventing free speech protections for criticism of religion.

Unprecedented legal case

If the defendant is convicted, this case could lead to blasphemy once again being criminalised in England and Wales – without Parliament passing a single law relating to blasphemy since 2008. 

Two similar cases were brought earlier in 2025. A similar trial in Manchester ended in February following a separate Quran-burning incident. However, in that case, the defendant pled guilty at trial, meaning his rights to freedom of religion or belief and of expression were never tested in court. In another parallel, a Christian street preacher in Walsall faced similar charges after publicly denouncing the Quran, but his case was dismissed in March after a judge concluded the CPS had not brought sufficient evidence of any crime. 

In both the London and Walsall cases, the men were themselves the victims of blasphemy-motivated violence immediately prior to being arrested; the London protester was stabbed in the stomach, while the Walsall preacher had his throat slit. Humanists UK has previously cautioned that blasphemy-motivated extremism and violence is a growing problem, and that such violence is inevitably encouraged when prohibitions on ‘blasphemy’ are legitimised by authorities.

A Humanists UK spokesperson said:

‘We are deeply alarmed to see that blasphemy laws may be making a comeback in England and Wales, 17 years after their ostensible abolition. While we condemn any act of incitement to hatred, it is deeply concerning to see a case being pursued against someone for damaging a religious text.  It threatens freedom of expression which this country has so long championed at home and abroad.

‘If the law can be used to criminalise expression that should be protected, it needs to be amended.’

At a meeting of the All-Party Parliamentary Humanist Group in May, organised by Humanists UK, MPs and peers expressed concern about the implications of this case and reaffirmed their commitment to protecting freedom of expression in law. Lord Walney, who had been commissioned by the previous government to make recommendations on how best to defend democracy from extremism, urged the new government to address the ambiguities highlighted by Wednesday’s trial.

Humanists UK successfully campaigned for the abolition of blasphemy laws in England and Wales in 2008, welcomed their repeal in Scotland last year, and continues to campaign for the end of blasphemy laws in Northern Ireland and around the world. In a statement to the UN last year, Humanists UK reminded states that blasphemy laws (such as those against damaging religious books) are not compatible with freedom of speech nor the UN Rabat Plan on hate crime. Countries with blasphemy laws typically see much more religious violence of this kind than countries without. Instead, the state has a duty to treat violence and violent threats with the utmost seriousness. Following Denmark’s decision to introduce a Quran-burning blasphemy law and similar calls made in the UK in 2024, Humanists UK received reassurances from Downing Street that no such laws would be introduced here.