Government scraps sedition laws


by Newswire    
1:23 am - July 11th 2009

Tweet       Share on Tumblr

From a press release
Writers and freedom of speech campaigners today expressed relief that the Government has finally relented, and agreed to abolish the offences of seditious libel and criminal defamation. The Ministry of Justice’s move comes after a long campaign by free speech organisations, their advocates, and opposition politicians.

The laws, which date from the time of the Star Chamber, made criticism of the Monarch or the Government a criminal offence, and were used to silence political dissent. Like the law of blasphemy, they fell out of use in the twentieth century – but their existence in the UK does no favours to the right to free expression worldwide.

In March this year, campaigning groups English PEN, Index on Censorship and Article 19 urged the government to abolish these offences. Amendments to the Coroners & Justice Bill were tabled in the House of Commons by Dr Evan Harris MP, and then again in the House of Lords by Lord Lester of Herne Hill, before the Government eventually accepted the case for abolition and promised to get rid of the laws themselves.

The proposed removal of these offences in the UK clears a path for campaigners to argue for their abolition overseas. Bringing the issue to debate, Lord Lester of Herne Hill said:

Across Europe and the Commonwealth, similar offences exist and are used to suppress political criticism and dissent. If our Parliament takes this step, it will be an example elsewhere and might also encourage the European Court of Human Rights to adopt a robust position in reviewing such laws and their operation.

Lisa Appignanesi, President of English PEN, said:

Thomas Paine would be pleased to know that 217 years after his conviction for seditious libel, the law which criminalized his ground-breaking Rights of Man, is at last poised to be repealed. The debate in the Lords on 9th July, led by Lord Lester and following on Evan Harris’ amendment in the Commons, marks an historic moment in our right to speak and think freely. Criminal libel has no place in a vibrant democracy.

Dr Evan Harris MP (Lib Dem), who first tabled the repeal amendments in the House of Commons said

It may be decades late in coming, but the acceptance by the Government that our retention of these repressive laws causes much more harm than good is welcome. The UK must set an example to the world in getting rid of anti-speech offences.

The common law of seditious libel prohibits all writings and other utterances which tend to bring about hatred or contempt for the king, the Government or the constitution as by law established. Sedition consists of any act done or word spoken or written and published which has a seditious tendency, and done or spoken or written and published with a seditious intent.

Lord Anthony Lester of Herne Hill tabled two amendments (177 and 178) to the Coroners & Justice Bill, which would remove the laws of seditious libel and criminal defamation from the statue books. Following the statement by Lord Bach, the government will insert similar amendments at the report stage of the Bill.

  Tweet   Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author

· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Civil liberties ,Media


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


1. Will Rhodes

Any comments?

Any links?

2. Just Visiting

I know Tim F of these parts has said that fascists do not deserve freedom of speech (not an entirely easy position to defend), but I guess if he felt the two ‘nutters’ fit the fascist label, he’d be happy about their conviction.

For the rest of us, if we want laws against ‘inciting violence’, then convictions will (only very occasionally it seems) occur.

So it depends if we want freedom of speech to mean freedom to say literally anything, no holds barred.

Or if we want some limits: then are we happy that the law on incitement to violence provides some sensible start or not.

The law is in line with other western nations which also do not have 100% unfettered freedom of speech- eg in Germany it’s illegal to deny the holocaust, in Holland Mein Kampf is banned.

3. Tiger-Burning-Bright

Banning a book is fairly meaningless if it is easily accessible on the Internet.

If ‘Just Visiting’ tries looking for 30 minutes and scotts around s/he’ll probably find ‘Mein Kampf’ is almost every major language.

4. Nick

Will – over here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/29/obscenity_trial_off/

and here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jul/10/race-hate-internet-holocaust

I think it is unfortunate that some on the liberal left seem pretty relaxed about these sort of race hate laws. I mean they are clearly shits of the highest order, but that doesn’t mean they should be jailed for speaking/writing their mind.

5. Shatterface

Being a shit shouldn’t be a prosecutable offence.

Where ‘incitement’ is alleged, I want to see the names of those who are being ‘incited’ on the charge sheet, not some abstract ‘potential’ perpetrator of violence who might just be listening.

There’s a difference between someone in authority telling their followers to go out and commit a crime and some pervert sharing his rape-murder fantasies with the Internet.

If de Sade was around today, he’d still be in jail.


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    Article: Government scraps sedition laws http://bit.ly/SFQNA

    [Original tweet]

  2. Liberal Conspiracy

    Article: Government scraps sedition laws http://bit.ly/SFQNA

    [Original tweet]

  3. Gareth Winchester

    Yay! http://bit.ly/SFQNA

    [Original tweet]





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.