In Britain, the first prison sentences were handed down to those who have been fueling riots across the country in fresh days with their social media entries. These controversial judgments bring debate on the boundaries of freedom of expression and the policy of multiculturalism.
Convicted for posting on social media
The first individual to hear the conviction is the 28-year-old Jordan Parlour of Leeds. From 1 to 5 August, he posted respective Facebook entries, including 1 in which he called for the attack of the Britannia Hotel, where 210 asylum seekers were accommodated. He was sentenced to 20 months in prison.
The next convicts were 21-year-old Bradley Makin of Sunderland, who received 2 years in prison for encouraging riots and 26-year-old Tyler Kay of Northampton, sentenced to 38 months for calling for the arson of hotels where asylum seekers were placed.
Government policy and Prime Minister's announcements
A fewer days ago, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced that inciting online riots would be treated on an equal footing with physical participation in them. Those who post specified entries may anticipate to be punished with absolute imprisonment. This announcement met with mixed reactions. On the 1 hand, supporters of a tough force policy praise the government for its determined action. On the another hand, critics argue that freedom of speech is under threat.
Riot background
The riots that broke out on July 30 are anti-immigrant and anti-Islamic. The initiator of the protests was the assassination of 3 several-year-old girls made on July 29 in Southport close Liverpool by 17-year-old Axel Rudakubana, who was born in Wales but has Rwandan roots.
Since then, the situation in Britain has been tense. So far, nearly 600 people have been arrested in connection with the riots, and more than 150 have heard the charges. The first convictions for participating in the riots came on Wednesday. Crimes committed most by persons of immigrant origin, specified as theft, rape, armed robbery and knife attacks, are increasingly seen as the everyday life of the British.
Freedom of speech versus suppressing criticism and politicians' mistakes
Court decisions in the cases of Jordan Parlour, Bradley Makin and Tyler Kay pose questions about the limits of freedom of speech in the context of public security. Supporters of harsh penalties say that incitement to violence, even in the form of social media entries, cannot be tolerated. Critics, on the another hand, fear that specified judgments may lead to excessive restrictions on freedom of expression.
Summary
These issues show how hard it is for modern societies to balance freedom of speech and public security. In the face of increasing social tensions and the challenges of multiculturalism, governments must make hard decisions that do not always meet universal acceptance.
The UK is presently at a crossroads, where future action by the authorities can importantly influence interior policy and social relations.
Daniel Głogowski
Expert in his field – Publicist, author and social activist. The first articles were published in 1999 for global publishers. For more than 30 years, he has gained his experience through cooperation with the largest editorial offices. In his articles, he seeks to address controversial topics and present first viewpoints that allowed for a deeper knowing of the issues discussed.
More here:
Britain in the totalitarian abyss. Courts issue first years of prison sentences for online entries
