Democracy cannot exist without the right to free speech.
Free speech should be robustly defended as a fundamental freedom.
The National Secular Society has defended free speech from religious threats since our founding. We played an instrumental role in abolishing "blasphemy" laws in Britain, but serious concerns remain. Blasphemy laws still exist in Northern Ireland. And throughout the UK, religious fundamentalists seek to impose their blasphemy taboos on others through violence and intimidation.
There are also increasing attempts to categorise offending religious sensibilities as 'hate speech', making criticism, mockery or perceived 'insult' of religion a criminal act akin to racial hatred or inciting violence – in other words, a 'blasphemy law by the back door'.
Without free speech no search for truth is possible; without free speech no discovery of truth is useful; without free speech progress is checked… Better a thousand fold abuse of free speech than denial of free speech.
We are further concerned by a developing 'culture of offence' in which any speech or action deemed likely to offend religious sensibilities is considered taboo. Enforced by a toxic mix of terrorism and religious deference, this is chilling free speech through self-censorship.
We also campaign against blasphemy laws around the world, where they continue to be used to target religious and political minorities. These are sometimes described by UK politicians as 'misuse' of blasphemy laws, but we contend there are never any legitimate uses for blasphemy laws.
Being offended from time to time is the price we all pay for living in a free society. Rather than trying to silence those we disagree with, we believe the answer to speech we don't like is more speech – better speech.
We therefore campaign to protect and preserve freedom of expression, including offensive, critical and shocking speech.
What you can do
1. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue.
2. Join us
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
NSS welcomes moves to protect free speech on communications offences
Posted: Thu, 29 Jul 2021 14:40
The National Secular Society has welcomed moves to protect freedom of expression in a Law Commission report on proposed reforms to communications offences in England and Wales.
Last week the commission published a final report on proposals which would remove or update a range of existing offences relating to communications.
These include plans to replace offences which criminalise communications which are offensive or indecent with an individual offence which focuses on the harm they cause.
The new offence would now require the prosecution to prove that a defendant had:
- Sent or posted a communication which was "likely to cause harm to a likely audience";
- Intended to cause harm to a likely audience;
- No reasonable excuse for doing so.
The commission's explanation of the offence describes harm as "psychological harm" amounting "at least to serious distress".
It adds that courts must have regard to the context a communication was sent within, and to whether it was meant as "a contribution to a matter of public interest".
Changes to commission's proposals
In January the NSS responded to a consultation on the commission's initial proposals and warned that the new offence was too imprecisely drafted, creating a possible chilling effect on free speech.
The commission now says it has reflected on the "scope" of the offence it proposed, and made changes to "provide robust protection for freedom of expression while targeting harmful communications more effectively and appropriately".
The previous drafting would have criminalised communications where the sender was "aware of a risk of causing harm" to a likely audience. This language has now been removed, meaning the prosecution must prove intent to cause harm.
The commission's previous definition of harm was also vaguer: "emotional or psychological harm, amounting to at least serious emotional distress".
The NSS's consultation submission warned that the offence as originally drafted could restrict free speech on religion and suggested that a specific protection may help to prevent this. The commission hasn't specifically addressed this subject.
Commission explains its position
Explaining its position in the final report, the commission said:
- The "breadth and vagueness" of existing offences give rise to "concerns about the extent of the law's interference in freedom of expression".
- The threshold for prosecution is "often set too low" and current offences "over-criminalise in some situations and under-criminalise in others".
- Its reforms are designed to show how the law can be "modernised to address online and offline communications in a proportionate and efficient way".
NSS comment
NSS spokesperson Helen Nicholls welcomed the commission's changes.
"The Law Commission's regard for freedom of expression in these proposals is refreshing.
"The commission is right to focus on the harm caused by communications, rather than offence. The commission appears to have accepted that the initial way it drafted the offence was too woolly, and its revisions will go a long way to addressing legitimate concerns.
"But legislators should continue to be wary of the risk of undermining free speech, particularly on religion, if they take these proposals forward. Any offence should be narrowly and precisely drafted."
Image: New Africa/Shutterstock.com.
Proposed advertising rules may fuel religious censorship, NSS warns
Posted: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 07:54
The National Secular Society has alerted the bodies which write advertising regulation guidelines that new proposals may result in greater religious censorship.
The NSS warned the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) and the Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice (BCAP) that proposed rules may "inadvertently have a detrimental effect on the public – including on the basis of their protected characteristics".
CAP and BCAP have launched a consultation over proposed rules designed to increase protection to "those sharing protected characteristics" as defined by the Equality Act 2010.
The proposed rules say marketers and broadcasters "must have particular regard to the likelihood of causing harm" to vulnerable people and to characteristics including "religion or belief".
The consultation document did not define "harm", saying it "is a commonly understood term".
In response to the consultation, the NSS said a religious person could argue they were 'harmed' by an advert that offended their beliefs. This could lead to censorship of depictions of people representing other protected characteristics.
The NSS cited past examples of such censorship:
- In 2010 the Advertising Standards Agency, the regulator which enforces the CAP code, banned a Antonio Federici ice cream advert (pictured, cropped to fit) showing two priests who appeared to be on the verge of kissing because it was potentially "offensive to Catholics". The NSS warned such censorship fuels "homophobic social narratives that there is something inherently offensive, shameful and immoral about being gay".
- The ASA banned a second advert by Antonio Federici featuring a pregnant nun. The NSS said the ban "reinforces social stigmas about pregnancy outside of marriage."
- CAP's guidance on "religious offence" says marketers "should be mindful of how they portray sex, nudity and women if marketing communications, especially posters, are likely to be seen by people with strong religious belief." Singling out of women in connection to "sex and nudity", and suggesting that pictures of women should be censored, "helps to enable religious subjugation of women", the NSS said.
The NSS recommended that CAP and BCAP "re-consider the necessity of these additional rules" and "provide greater clarity" as to what is meant by 'harm'. It said CAP and BCAP should make explicit reference in the guidance to the need to protect free speech and to avoid the harm that over-censorship of marketing and advertising materials can cause to people on the basis of their protected characteristics.
NSS head of policy and research Megan Manson said: "Equality law exists to protect individuals from harassment, discrimination and victimisation, not to protect ideas or the interests of religious institutions.
"Censoring adverts to appease religious interest can harm people on the basis of other protected characteristics, including sex and sexual orientation, by reinforcing regressive social stigmas. It is also corrosive to free speech, and in effect partly brings back the 'blasphemy laws' which were abolished in 2008.
"CAP and BCAP's proposed rules are well-intended. But without a clearer definition of 'harm', it is difficult to see how these rules will not inevitably lead to greater censorship of material that may offend religious beliefs – and, in turn, harm the very people that CAP and BCAP seek to protect."
The consultation closes on August 24.
