While on vacation recently a friend claimed that it was “illegal” in the UK to “insult the Queen” so it was hypocritical for people in the UK to criticize Turkey’s banning of “insulting Turkishness”?
Are people in the UK really put in jail for “insulting the Queen”?
That didn’t make a lot of sense to me since people in the UK can openly call for the abolishment of the monarchy and I’ve heard plenty of British comedians lampoon the Royal family(though I honestly don’t remember the Queen herself getting mocked).
So, what is the truth.
And yes, I’m fully aware that the UK and the US have different ideas when it comes to what does and doesn’t constitute “free speech”.
I can’t imagine how anyone could think this remotely possible. You can say what you like about any public figure — provided you don’t libel them; and even then it would be a civil matter for them to sue you, not involving jail ( unless you commit perjury ). The present Royal Family don’t sue people.
Spitting Image, a parody puppet show, ran in Britain from 1984 to 1996
So a modicum of disrespect has been acceptable for a while. However, in polite society many many years ago, certain things were just “not done”. Trashing the Royals was just uncouth. However, even in Victoria’s day, she was fairly unpopular toward the end of her reign, and rumors circulated that she was having an affair with one of her advisors after her husband died.
Certainly not like Thailand, where a hint of disrespect will earn a jail sentence. (And *The King and I *is banned)
The Google-friendly term you should search for is lèse-majesté and gives many examples, including some first world democratic monarchies. The only mention of the UK is that it wasn’t abolished in Scotland until 2010, although it hasn’t been used for hundreds of years. The largest section is on Thailand and it has been used recently and fairly often. Also note that many of these are against insulting any head of state.
Expose the person to hatred, ridicule or contempt.
Cause the person to be shunned or avoided.
Lower the person in the estimation of right thinking members of society.
Disparage the person in their business, trade, office or profession.*
A defamatory statement in any written or other permanent form is Libel. If a statement is deemed to be defamatory by a judge the person defamed is entitled to monetary compensation.
As Defamation is a civil rather than criminal offence you cannot go to jail for carrying it out. You can only be fined.
However depending on the seriousness of the statement made fines can be very hefty.
Seriously, no-one, and definitely not the Queen, will care about what you think or say.
There was never, SFAIK, a specific offence of insulting the monarch, but there was (and still is, to a tiny extent) a rather widely-draw offence of “sedition”, which is conduct intended to bring the monarch, parliament, courts, constitution, etc of the country into hatred or contempt, or to incite criminal disturbances of the peace, or make the subjects discontented, or promote hostility between different classes of subject. Obviously, sufficiently virulent insults of the monarch could be classed as sedition.
The last prosecution was in the early 1970s (and that had nothing to do with insulting the queen; it involved people attempting to recruit others to travel to Northern Ireland to fight on behalf of Republicans there). The common law offence was abolished in England and Wales in 2010, and in Scotland in 2011. I haven’t tracked down when it was abolished in Northern Ireland, but probably around the same time.
But sedition by an alien (i.e. a person who doesn’t have British, Commonwealth or Irish nationality) is still a statutory offence in England and Wales.
You are put in jail in Thailand for insulting the king, often for 15 years. Thais who travel to Britain are gobsmacked at how the royal family there are treated.
Heck, I’m gobsmacked at how the Thais treat the Thai royal family. That family doesn’t really seems to have done a whole lot of nothing to earn the respect shown to them. IMHO, Thailand’s royal family is the sole reason for the lèse-majesté law there–to keep legitimate criticism of the joke that family is from being aired in public. Thailand is the country in the most need of getting rid of royalty, but it’ll never happen thanks to that vicious law.
So, how many years incarceration should that earn me?
Heck, I’m gobsmacked at how the Thais treat the Thai royal family. That family really seems to have done a whole lot of nothing to earn the respect shown to them. IMHO, Thailand’s royal family is the sole reason for the lèse-majesté law there–to keep legitimate criticism of the joke that family is from being aired in public. Thailand is the country in the most need of getting rid of royalty, but it’ll never happen thanks to that vicious law.
So, how many years incarceration would that earn me?
Looking it up:
1/ they sued for intrusion, not for anything said about them.
2/ They won an injunction, and the handing over of the photographs.
3/ It was a French magazine, owned by the Italian prime minister, the very highly regarded Silvio Berlusconi: no defendant brits were involved.
4/ Donald Trump ruled in as Censor, rebuking the sinning couple on Twitter for her shameful nudity.
Like that other presbyterian republican, Murdoch, he is a true son of the manse, and we tremble at his thunders.
Sure. But under English law the libelling defendant has to prove the truth.
If I said [ famous ] X is an idiot, that is opinion. If I say he is a scoundrel, it’s more serious, but there wouldn’t be much of a trial. If I say he stole a dollar, and he sued on the grounds he isn’t a thief, I would have to show that he did steal a dollar.
However, there aren’t many libel actions anyway, and things can be proved if true, a lot of the time. However it’s best to avoid specifics when denouncing people.
Actually, there are a new raft of laws concerning race relations and classes of people, and internet bullying laws, which can lead to jail. They are slightly off as far as ideal freedom is concerned, but they can be easily avoided — just as going and screaming outside someone’s house can be easily avoided — but they don’t involve penalties for saying anything about our ruling classes.
Its interesting to me that libel is decided before examining truth or any other defense. Seems like its a slight waste of the courts time. Or can these issues be handled through pretrial filings?
