For those deemed by the state to have ‘offensive’ views, living in Britain is like living in an open prison, argues Patrick Hayes
At his keynote speech at the Liberal Democrat conference last weekend, deputy prime minister Nick Clegg laid claim to the legacy of John Stuart Mill, calling his book On Liberty “A reminder that we are the inheritors of a century and a half of radical liberal tradition”.
Despite his boasts, you have to wonder if Mill’s seminal work has become just a ceremonial ornament gracing Lib Dem mantel pieces or whether any of them ever bother to pick it up and read it. If they do, what do they make of lines such as: ‘Strange it is, that men should admit the validity of the arguments for free discussion, but object to their being “pushed to an extreme”; not seeing that unless the reasons are good for an extreme case, they are not good for any case’?
Mill would doubtless find it extremely odd that his ‘heirs’ have not uttered a peep in defence of Shane Overton, who last week had basic political freedoms stripped away from him for doing nothing more than speaking his mind.
Certainly the unemployed 38-year-old Overton is a classic example of what Mill would have called an ‘extreme case’. On the way back from an English Defence League (EDL) demo he attended in Newcastle, he shouted offensive remarks at an Asian family at a railway station. Apparently he ‘used racist abuse and told them to “get out of our country”’.
Such obnoxious language should certainly be condemned and challenged. But, whilst he frightened the family, he didn’t inflict any physical violence upon them: only words. However, as punishment for saying what he thought, he has now been subject to such a punishment so illiberal that it would have Mill spinning in his grave.
Last week Overton was given a Criminal Antisocial Behaviour Order (Crasbo) by a judge. For ten years it prevents him from attending or organising any EDL demonstration, meeting or gathering or even visiting its website. He was also banned from travelling by train anywhere in the UK and from entering a mosque, meeting room, school or cultural centre. So for the next decade Overton is unable to exercise basic democratic freedoms of association, expression or even movement.
This isn’t the first time this legislation has been used in such a prohibitive manner. Last December, as punishment for ‘disruptive behaviour’ on a demonstration in Aylesbury, two EDL members were restricted from attending any protest whatsoever – regardless of content – that takes place further than ten miles from Birmingham.
Strikingly the judge in this case deemed that this wasn’t a free speech issue as he couldn’t see why the EDL were demonstrating in Aylesbury anyway. Because, in his eyes, that event had no ‘purpose’, he believed they could legitimately be prevented from protesting almost anywhere in the UK for a decade, regardless of why they were protesting. Even if a rally was held in London in defence of their freedom of expression, they would – it seems – face arrest or imprisonment, if they attended it.
As Mill put it, ‘unless the reasons are good for an extreme case, they are not good for any case’. The fact that the only people currently being affected by this draconian legislation are seemingly unpleasant individuals with ‘extreme’ views shouldn’t cloud the fact that the use of Crasbos in this way is a threat to us all. If we want to live in a free and open society, then feeling free to speak our mind, regardless of the offence it may cause, is of fundamental importance.
We do not have such a free and open society in the UK today. If we say something the state deems to be ‘offensive’, then we could be issued with a Crasbo, effectively making Britain an open prison for us, where we can’t exercise basic democratic freedoms. It may be easy to turn a blind eye when it’s only unsympathetic EDL types being treated this way. But it could be you next.
Patrick Hayes works at the Institute of Idea and is a reporter for the online magazine spiked