There was a win for free speech and freedom of religion in the UK this week with the religious harassment case against Christian preacher Karandeep Mamman thrown out.

Mamman was preaching on the streets in Walsall in January 2023. He was harassed and assaulted by an Islamic mob of 20 to 30 people who threatened to cut his throat after he critiqued the Quran.

According to The Christian Post:

The confrontation arose after Mamman critiqued the Quran, stating that it misrepresents Jesus Christ as merely a prophet rather than the Son of God. He shared his belief that Islam presents “a wrong Jesus” and said that the Quran promotes “hatred, terrorism, and killing of Jews and Christians who do not convert.”

Mamman was also harassed and assaulted by two men over a sign that suggested homosexuality was prohibited in the Bible.

But instead of finding protection in the UK law, Mamman himself was charged by police with causing “religiously aggravated harassment, alarm or distress” under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

The Christian Legal Centre, an organisation defending freedom of religion and speech in the UK, represented Mamman, but when the case came before the courts, the prosecution declined to present evidence and the case was thrown out.

Christian Legal Centre chief executive Andrea Williams expressed relief at the outcome but noted the concern that the charges were brought in the first place. Williams said:

“There are growing concerns over whether the UK government and authorities are defending free speech in the public sphere. More must be done to protect free speech and cherished Christian freedoms in our town squares, not just in Walsall, but across the UK.”

There are similar concerns in Australia where the process is the punishment and free speech cases are brought against Christians that drag on for years.

Across the western world, laws like the UK Crime and Disorder Act or the Australian Online Safety Act 2021 used against Billboard Chris, as well as anti-vilification or “hate speech” laws, are applied inconsistently. They often target Christians, conservatives, or others criticising particular secular ideological narratives while other inflammatory speech or activity is ignored.

HRLA clients like Lyle Shelton and Jasmine Sussex are two prominent examples of using vilification laws to shut down free speech on contentious but important issues.

While Karandeep Mamman enjoyed an encouraging win, the case it also demonstrates the need for vigilance in the defence of freedom of speech.