Sam Armstrong

🚨🚨 BREAKING NEWS: Animal rights campaigner, Anneka Svenska, was visited at home by two police officers and told to accept a police record, attend an “online thinking” course, or face arrest following comments she made on social media about the incineration of beagles at a company that breeds the dogs for use in medical research. The police alleged that she had committed a crime under the Online Safety Act. Anneka refused to accept this “community resolution disposal”, which would have remained on her police record, and, after she engaged a lawyer, the case has now been dropped. Section 179 of the Online Safety Act was introduced by the last Conservative Government and made it a crime, punishable by up to 51 weeks in prison, to knowingly spread false information likely to cause harm. While the Bill was going through Parliament, the FSU warned it might be weaponised in this way to silence legitimate political speech. Anneka doesn’t believe the information she spread about the company was false. In fact, she has documentary evidence which she says substantiates her claims. Until the Online Safety Act was passed, the company unhappy about comments like this would have had to bring a defamation claim in the civil courts. Now, it seems, hurty words online can quickly become a police matter – and it seems that companies are now making criminal complaints as part of their brand protection strategies. If you are visited by the police for a speech matter, we’d urge you to take specialist legal advice before accepting any form of caution or submitting to a re-education course. Members of the Free Speech Union can ask for our help if they find themselves in a similar situation.

A British university student is facing prosecution after comparing a Keffiyeh worn by a pro-Palestinian activist to a “tea towel” during Freshers’ Fair at @RoyalHolloway. 20-year-old Brodie Mitchell told the President of the Friends of Palestine Society, Huda El-Jamal, that her keffiyeh looked like a “tea towel” after she called him a “wannabe Jew” because he was defending Israel and mocked him for not wearing a Jewish “hat”. In a classic case of double standards on campus, Brodie was handed a nine-week suspension the following day “for alleged conduct that could be considered hate speech”. He was told his comments were “Islamophobic”, “racist”, and “anti-Palestinian” and was barred from campus and forced to leave his student accommodation. Surrey Police have now confirmed they have sent a file to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for a charging decision — meaning Brodie could face prosecution for saying El-Jamal’s headscarf looked like a “tea towel”. Meanwhile, she faced no disciplinary action and continued her studies as normal. Welcome to two-tier Britain. The case could be the first of many, given the Government’s decision to publish an official definition of “anti-Muslim hostility” and encourage universities to embed it in their speech policies. The definition is already being used to silence legitimate criticism of Islam. The Free Speech Union is supporting Brodie. With our help, he has been allowed back on campus, but under conditions that dictate who he can speak to and what he’s allowed to say. With our support, Brodie is taking Royal Holloway to the High Court, arguing he was unfairly forced to miss seven weeks of teaching, potentially delaying completion of his degree. We’ve also provided him with a top-notch criminal legal team in case the CPS decides to prosecute him. His own university, Royal Holloway, is spending nearly three-quarters of a million pounds defending its actions. At a recent hearing, it initially said its total costs could be as high as £734,000, with the risk that Brodie will have to pay them if he loses. In other words, the university is trying to scare him into dropping the case. But we’ve got his back. Welcome to the reality of free speech on English university campuses. In the absence of the complaints scheme that was legislated for in the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act being activated by Bridget Phillipson – she has delayed doing so for 18 months now – these are the ruinous costs facing students who want to stand up for their right to free speech. On this week’s episode of the FSU Podcast, Brodie Mitchell (@BrodieMitchell1) shares his story with @_ConnieShaw. The full episode is available on the FSU YouTube channel (link in first reply).

🚨 BREAKING: Hamit Coskun has won his case in the High Court The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) relentlessly pursued Hamit Coskun for burning a copy of the Quran outside the Turkish Consulate in London. They have failed. But this is not the end. Since Keir Starmer became Prime Minister, three men have been prosecuted for burning copies of the Quran. The Free Speech Union has represented all three. That is why we need your support. Despite our victory in Hamit’s case, the CPS is still prosecuting another FSU member. On 1 February 2025, Martin Frost set fire to a copy of the Quran in Manchester city centre. Police quickly arrived. He told officers he was demonstrating solidarity with Salwan Momika, an anti-Islam activist in Sweden who was murdered after burning a Quran. Like Hamit, Martin was charged under the Public Order Act 1986. We believe Martin’s case should be thrown out. Parliament abolished blasphemy laws in 2008. Blasphemy is not an offence in English law. In Hamit’s case, the High Court was clear: public order laws cannot be twisted to reintroduce blasphemy by the back door. Yet the CPS appears determined to press ahead. In Hamit’s case, it instructed one of the most expensive KCs in the country and secured a conviction before we overturned it in the High Court. We must be prepared to fight again. Martin’s trial is listed at Manchester Crown Court for 13–15 November 2027. We may succeed in getting the case dismissed — but we need your help. We do not know why there has been a surge in arrests for Quran burning over the past year. But we do know this: no government should use public order law to enforce religious blasphemy codes. In a free society, no religion is beyond criticism. We are standing with Martin and others for their right to speak freely. If you can, please donate to help us stop the revival of Britain’s blasphemy laws via the back door 👇