Take part in the Section 5 Consultation
Section 5 of the Public Order Act and the word 'insulting'
In 2012 we will submit a response to the Police Powers consultation referring to the removal of the word 'insulting' from Section 5 of the Public Order Act. This states that it is an offence to use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.
The NSS believes that insult is too subjective and nebulous a concept, and too open to abuse; the idea of what is insulting changes with time and place, for example. Its removal would protect freedom of expression – for both the religious and non-religious. We support the campaign by religious groups like the Christian Institute to protect their right to freedom of expression while we also want to ensure that 'insulting' cannot be used by the religious to prevent debate or criticism. We do not want the law used as a weapon against anyone who disagrees with or challenges someone else's beliefs.
Individuals are already protected from real harm or harassment by other laws. There are many alternative powers in existence to prevent or to prosecute behaviour that is abusive, or risks a breach of the peace, or amounts to harassment, or has religious, racial, sexual or disability hatred elements, or where people are placed in fear.
The offence under Section 5 was the most controversial of the statutory offences in the Public Order Act 1986 both before and during the passage of the Bill. Courts have to consider these cases in the light of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects freedom of expression. A 1994 Home Office study found that a large majority of section 5 cases brought before the courts involved threatening or abusive behaviour, rather than insulting conduct. In addition, the removal of the word 'insulting' from section 5 would bring English law into line with Scottish law.
Section 5 has been used to arrest and/or prosecute (for example) religious campaigners against homosexuality, a British National Party member who displayed anti-Islamic posters in his window and people who have sworn at the police. Police charged a teenage anti-Scientology protestor, although the charges were later dropped, as they were in the case of a student arrested for calling a police horse 'gay'. Hotel owners were charged (although later acquitted) following a religious discussion with a Muslim guest.
The Human Rights Joint Committee said that 'We recommend that the Government amend section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 so that it cannot be used inappropriately to suppress the right to free speech, by deleting the reference to language or behaviour that is merely "insulting." This amendment would provide proportionate protection to individuals' right to free speech, whilst continuing to protect people from threatening or abusive speech. We suggest such an amendment.'
Liberty have already called on the Government to remove the word 'insulting' because they are' concerned about the breadth of offences under section 4A and 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 (POA) which we believe can have a chilling effect on free speech and an impact on legitimate protests… While the courts may be reluctant to convict a person in relation to using 'insulting' words or signs, the mere fact that this is a criminal offence is enough to stifle freedom of expression'.
We encourage our supporters to respond to the consultation themselves.
Read our campaign paper on freedom of expression
Click here for Information on the consultation and a printable response form