Clause 61 (formerly clause 58) of the Coroners and Justice Bill, passed by the Commons, represents a real and present danger to freedom of speech in England and Wales. It is expected to be considered in the House of Lords at Committee Stage on 9 July 2009.
If passed, ordinary, peaceful people across the nation will be subject to the kind of oppressive regime unimaginable to political thinkers of previous generations, without there being any benefit to anyone.
The deeply pernicious effect of this proposed legislation would be to create a climate of fear surrounding the mere discussion of sexual ethics.
The law as it stands is very reasonable, thanks to Lord Waddington’s provision, which preserves the important freedom to discuss and to comment on sexual ethics generally. No reasonable person supports the stirring up of hatred. Equally however, no reasonable person should object to peaceful criticism and discussion of sexual behaviour. Repealing this clause will remove this clarity of distinction on the face of the statute. No amount of guidelines will undo the damage this will cause.
Stirring up hatred on grounds of sexual orientation carries a sentence of up to seven years’ imprisonment. Without the clarity of distinction between discussion and the stirring up of hatred which Lord Waddington’s amendment provides, ordinary people will be frightened to exercise their fundamental right to freedom of peacefully-held expression.
In addition to the substantive attack on the freedom to express a peacefully held view, this Bill undermines democracy itself. Only 12 months ago, Lord Waddington’s free speech clause in the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 (Schedule 16(14)) was accepted by Parliament and became law. To smuggle in repeal of this very recent and properly-achieved amendment under the cover of a new Bill is an affront to our system of Government and should be rejected on principle on these grounds if no other.
CCFON is a Christian organisation that seeks to defend the freedoms of Christians to make a peaceful and reasonable case for Biblical sexual ethics. However, we feel that both the substantive and the procedural issues in this case are of vital importance to Christians and others alike, in the interests of democracy and of the basic right to be able to express a peacefully-held view.
We urge the House of Lords to reject the Government’s attempt to remove the free speech provision, and we urge all who share our concerns to visit the following website for further information: