00:00We now move on to the 10-minute rule motion, freedom of expression, and I come to Nick Timothy.
00:07Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I beg to move that leave be given to bring in a bill
00:12to make provision about freedom of expression in relation to religion or belief systems and for connected purposes.
00:20Madam Deputy Speaker, I do not believe that Mohammed was a prophet sent by God.
00:25I do not accept the instructions he said he received from the archangel Gabriel.
00:30I do not accept that the sunnah, or body of Islamic laws, has any relevance to me.
00:36I respect the religious beliefs of others, but I do not mind if Mohammed is satirised, criticised, or mocked.
00:42I am not a Muslim, and I choose not to live by the moral codes set out by Islam.
00:46I am a Christian, and I should make clear that I do not think anybody should be prosecuted
00:51for satirising, criticising, or mocking Jesus either.
00:56England and Wales abolished blasphemy laws in 2008, and Scotland abolished them in 2021.
01:03But even then, those laws had not been used for decades.
01:07The last blasphemy trial took place in 1977,
01:10and the state has not brought a public prosecution for blasphemy in more than a century.
01:14But now blasphemy laws are back.
01:16I have been advised not to refer to two high-profile cases of people being arrested,
01:21charged, and prosecuted for causing harassment, alarm, or distress
01:25to Muslims, or even nonsensically to Islam itself.
01:29So while I will keep my speech to the conceptual,
01:32I invite the House to recall that there are real examples of what I raise
01:35in the criminal justice system right now.
01:37The issue is the way Sections 4 and 5 of the Public Order Act 1986
01:42are being used, far beyond the intent of Parliament,
01:46to police what we can and cannot say about Islam.
01:49I will come to the details of Sections 4 and 5,
01:52but first I want to say something about the intent of the Public Order Act.
01:57The long title of the Act makes clear its purpose was to abolish
02:00some common law and statutory offences,
02:03to make way for new offences relating to public order.
02:05Nowhere in the second reading debate from 1986
02:08did anybody raise the need to protect religions,
02:12or followers of religions, from offence.
02:14The context of the Act was football hooliganism
02:17and the riots in Brixton and Broadwater Farm.
02:20It's true that Part 3 of the Act created new offences relating to racial hatred,
02:25and this was amended to include religious hatred
02:28by the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006.
02:31But in Part 3, in Section 29J, to which we will return,
02:37the Public Order Act says,
02:38nothing in this part shall be read or given effect
02:41in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion,
02:44criticism or expressions of antipathy,
02:47dislike, ridicule, insults or abuse of particular religions
02:50or the beliefs or practices of their adherence.
02:53We can therefore be confident that the Public Order Act,
02:56even as amended, was never intended to become a blasphemy law.
03:01This obvious conclusion is reinforced by the fact
03:03that the controversies regarding blasphemy and Islam in this country
03:06began two years after its introduction,
03:09in 1988 with the publication of the Satanic Verses.
03:13Since that year, and the protests and fatwa against the Salman Rushdie,
03:17our public conversation about Islam has been limited
03:19through a mixture of self-censorship and more official restrictions,
03:23such as the definition of Islamophobia accepted by many public bodies.
03:28These restrictions are motivated not by a desire to avoid offence,
03:31consider the criticism and mockery made of other religions,
03:34but fear of a violent response by those who are offended.
03:38Some say public order offences are not the same as a blasphemy law,
03:42and that it can be legitimate to prosecute somebody
03:44for saying something that might cause wider disorder.
03:47Perhaps in some circumstances, this may be so.
03:51But we should interrogate this line of thinking.
03:54First, the Crown Prosecution Service gave the game away
03:57by charging one man with causing distress
04:00to the religious institution of Islam,
04:02which is pretty much the dictionary definition of blasphemy.
04:06But second, twisting the law to make a protester responsible
04:09for the violent reaction of those who will not tolerate
04:12the opinions of others is wrong.
04:15It destroys our freedom of speech.
04:17Some argue that while this may be regrettable,
04:20it's now an unavoidable consequence of the multicultural society
04:23in which we live today.
04:25By this logic, the state must police the boundaries
04:28between different ethnic and religious groups to avoid disorder.
04:32But we should be clear that this means state intrusion
04:35and a loss of liberty on some occasions,
04:38and mob rule on others.
04:39This is the very essence of the two-tier policing row we have seen recently.
04:45Rough justice for those belonging to identity groups
04:48that play by the rules,
04:49and freedom from justice for those belonging to groups
04:52willing to take to the streets and threaten violence.
04:55This is the logic of using the Public Order Act
04:58to prohibit us from saying what we like about a religion.
05:02A person may be found guilty because of the violent reaction
05:06of those offended by their actions.
05:09From Sir Salman Rushdie to the Batli teacher still in hiding
05:11with his family,
05:13the threat of violence is what lies behind these new blasphemy laws.
05:17Perhaps we should not be surprised.
05:20There are at least 14 Muslim-majority countries
05:22where the penalty for blasphemy or apostasy is death,
05:25and we have significant diaspora populations from many of them.
05:30With the number of people here who came from these countries growing
05:36and the increasing assertiveness of organised political Islam in Britain,
05:40this is a problem that seems likely to only get more severe.
05:45But the answer is not to surrender to the mob.
05:47It is to hold the line,
05:49and that is why today I bring forward this Bill.
05:52Madam Deputy Speaker,
05:53I said earlier that Section 29J of the Public Order Act
05:57protects criticism, insults and even abuse of religions
06:00and the beliefs and practices of their adherence.
06:05But this only applies to Part 3 of the legislation
06:07because Part 3 introduced offences relating to racial hatred,
06:11later amended to include religious hatred.
06:14Nobody thought Sections 4 and 5,
06:17which in Part 1 of the Act make it an offence
06:19to cause harassment, alarm or distress
06:21by using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour,
06:25would be used to criminalise the expression of opinion
06:28about religious belief.
06:30This Bill therefore extends the scope of 29J
06:33to the whole of the Public Order Act,
06:35thus preventing the use of Sections 4 and 5
06:37as a de facto blasphemy law,
06:39and applies Section 29 also
06:41to Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003
06:46and Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988.
06:52In doing so, this Bill would restore free speech
06:55as it applies to religion in England and Wales.
06:58It would stop the police, prosecutors and judges
07:00from creating a blasphemy law from legislation
07:03that was never passed for that purpose.
07:05It would send the strongest, powerful message
07:08from this place,
07:09where political power legitimately and democratically resides,
07:13that this country will not tolerate intimidation,
07:16violence or censorship,
07:18that there will be no special treatment here for Islam,
07:21and there will be no surrender to the thugs
07:23who want to impose their beliefs and culture
07:25on the rest of us.
07:26The question is that the Honourable Member
07:35have leave to bring in the Bill.
07:36As many in that opinion say aye.
07:38Aye.
07:39Of the contrary, no.
07:40The ayes have it.
07:41The ayes have it.
07:42Who will prepare and bring in the Bill?
07:45Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
07:46Nick Timothy.
08:16Freedom of Expression, Religion or Belief System Bill.
08:39Second reading what day?
08:40The 11th of July.
08:42The 11th of July.
08:46The 11th of July.
08:48The 11th of July.
08:49Within the 11th of July.
08:52The 11th of July.
08:56The 11th of July.
09:02The 11th of July.
09:03Certified Truth.
09:03Now that you have the on May of the 11th of July.
09:05The 11th of July.
09:07Number 10.
09:11Iưng.
09:14So therefore,
09:15let the 11th of July.
Comments