Why free speech in Britain is under threat
I explore this topic in greater detail in the video above, so please check it out. What I will do here is, as I usually do now, is fill in the gaps in the story.
I believe passionately in free speech. As a liberal, it is one of the cornerstones of my belief system. I fundamentally think we have the right to offend one another. Yes, incitement to violence is an important limit on speech, but I think the bar for that to be enforced needs to be remarkably high.
A lot of people are worried about the state of free speech in Britain. Some go as far as to say we have a “two-tier” justice system in the UK, with right-wing people getting treated more harshly than left-wing people when they say things that at least verge on incitement. I’d like to say that this idea is far-fetched and overblown - just another example of the lunacy of the online right, placing it somewhere alongside anti-vaxx conspiracy theories. Only thing is, I am finding it more and more difficult to dismiss.
Lucy Connolly is in prison for 31 months for a post on social media. Your politics will, at least 99% of the time, tell you whether you think this sentence is completely justified or if you believe she is basically a political prisoner, the most shining example of two-tier justice in modern Britain.
I don’t think Connolly is a political prisoner. But I also don’t think she should be in prison at all. I am not defending her tweet - I think it was absolutely appalling. I just don’t think saying appalling things on Twitter should be a criminal offence. If she had posted something along the lines of “There is a migrant hotel in town x. It is located at this address: xxxxx. I want everyone close to the hotel to go and burn it down”, then we have very clear incitement to violence, and not even a free speech purist such as myself would have cause to complain.
The further issue the Connolly case raises is that if what she did warrants more than two years in prison, then why can Kneecap say to a crowd “Kill your local MP” or Bob Vylan chant “Death to the IDF” in front of thousands? The Kneecap chant is much more solidly in the incitement to violence space than Connolly’s post, in my opinion. However, to absolutely stress: I don’t think Kneecap should be imprisoned, I don’t think Vylan should be in jail, and nor should Lucy Connolly. However, it is worth pointing out that one and only one of those just mentioned actually are incarcerated.
What really upsets me is that it is really difficult to find anyone who thinks none of the group comprising Connolly, Kneecap and Bob Vylan should be imprisoned. Most people think either Connolly definitely should be but to even suggest Kneecap ought to be investigated is some sort of British colonialism at work, while you have people on the right who will go to bat for Connolly’s right to offend, but then shout about how we need to lock Bob Vylan up.
Free speech benefits everyone. That’s why it is worth defending, even when it’s hard. Free speech is about defending the right of someone you disagree with to say something you don’t like. We are losing sight of that, more and more, all the time.
The point missing here is that Lucy Connolly pleaded guilty; and once she has pleaded guilty the appropriate sentence for incitement was applied. Bob Vylan and Kneecap are unlikely to plead guilty and, given the lack of proximity between their statements and the actual acts which they may be accused of inciting, I suspect they are unlikely to be found guilty. This is not two tier justice; it is a single tier consistently applied; don’t fall for the tendentious reporting of right wing commentators.
I think that you should read the Appeal Court's verdict on the Connolly case. It was clear that the sentencing guidelines were followed and that Connolly was advised of the consequences. The law was applied correctly. What is rather sad is that we have some journalists who are either woefully ill-informed or alternatively are actively trying to undermine the rule of law for political reasons.