The Crown Prosecution Service has lodged an appeal challenging a High Court ruling that quashed the criminal conviction of an anti-Islam activist who burned a Quran outside the Turkish consulate in London earlier this year.
Hamit Coskun had originally been convicted of a religiously aggravated public order offence after he shouted “Islam is religion of terrorism” and “f*** Islam” while desecrating a Quran outside the consulate in February, 2025.
The 51-year-old, who has received support from far-right activists, saw his conviction overturned by Mr Justice Bennathan in October.
According to the CPS, although the act of burning a religious text is not itself illegal, Mr Coskun’s behaviour “demonstrated hostility towards a religious or racial group, which is a crime.”
In a statement, the CPS said there was “no law to prosecute people for ‘blasphemy'”, but added: “Our case remains that Hamit Coskun’s words, choice of location and burning of the (Quran) amounted to disorderly behaviour… We have appealed the decision, and the judge has agreed to state a case for the High Court to consider.”
During Mr Coskun’s Quran-burning stunt in Knightsbridge, a man emerged from a nearby building and slashed at him with a large knife, later telling police he was protecting his religion.
The attacker, Moussa Kadri, 59, was given a suspended jail sentence in September, 2025.
Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest news and updates from around the Muslim world!
In June, the judge who found Coskun guilty said he had a “deep-seated hatred of Islam and its followers” based on his experiences in Turkey and the experiences of his family, and that it was “not possible to separate his views about the religion from his views about its followers”.
The judge also said: “A criminal conviction is a proportionate response to the defendant’s conduct.
“I am sure that the defendant acted in a disorderly way by burning the Qur’an very obviously in front of the Turkish consulate, where there were people who were likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress and accompanying his provocative act with bad language.
“I am sure that he was motivated at least in part by a hatred of Muslims. I therefore find the defendant guilty.”
Overturning the conviction at Southwark Crown Court, Mr Justice Bennathan said that while burning a book of such religious importance might be something “many Muslims find desperately upsetting and offensive”, the right to freedom of expression “must include the right to express views that offend, shock or disturb.”
