Man fined for burning Qur’an in London wins appeal against conviction

Man Fined for Burning Qur’an in London Wins Appeal Against Conviction

In a controversial legal reversal, Hamit Coskun, a 51-year-old Turkish-born man who was previously convicted for burning a copy of the Qur’an outside the Turkish consulate in London, has successfully appealed his conviction.

The incident occurred on February 13, 2025, in Rutland Gardens, Knightsbridge, where Coskun publicly set the Islamic holy book alight while shouting inflammatory slogans against Islam. He was initially found guilty at Westminster Magistrates’ Court of a religiously aggravated public order offence and fined £240, with an additional statutory surcharge of £96.

Coskun’s actions were widely condemned and sparked concerns about rising Islamophobia and hate speech in the UK. His conviction was seen by many as a necessary legal response to protect religious communities from targeted abuse.

However, the case took a dramatic turn when Coskun appealed the ruling at Southwark Crown Court. On October 10, 2025, Mr Justice Bennathan overturned the conviction, citing concerns about the implications for free speech. The judge acknowledged that while the act of burning a Qur’an was deeply offensive to many, it did not meet the threshold for criminal disorder under the law.

The appeal was supported by organizations such as the National Secular Society and the Free Speech Union, which argued that Coskun’s prosecution amounted to a modern-day blasphemy charge. They maintained that the legal system should not penalize individuals for expressing controversial or offensive views, provided those expressions do not incite violence or pose a clear threat to public order.

The ruling has been hailed by free speech advocates as a victory for civil liberties, though it has also raised fears of emboldening future anti-Islam demonstrations and hate-fueled provocations.

The Turkish government, which had previously condemned similar Qur’an-burning incidents in other European countries, expressed concern over the ruling. The broader Muslim community in the UK has voiced disappointment and apprehension, warning that the decision could set a dangerous precedent and undermine efforts to combat religious intolerance.

This case underscores the ongoing tension between protecting freedom of expression and safeguarding communities from hate speech and religious vilification.

As legal and social debates continue, the outcome of Coskun’s appeal may influence future interpretations of public order laws and the boundaries of lawful protest in Britain.