Freedom of Speech is a protected right we all have as members of the UK and under the European Convention of Human Rights.
A notable UK case, [Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 23 Jul 1999], in which it was held.
Lord Justice Sedley said: ‘Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having.”
The right to freedom of expression is crucial in a democracy, yes, we live in a democracy and not a police state, like some police would have you believe. Article 10 of the Human Rights Act safeguards the right to free expression, which includes the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without State interference.
“This right is particularly important for journalists and other people working in the media. They must be free to criticise the government and our public institutions without fear of prosecution – this is a vital feature of a democratic society.”
Understandably, criminalising any incitement of violence or threats would be a justifiable limit on freedom of expression. What is controversial is the criminalisation of language or behaviour which may be ‘unpleasant’, may cause offence but which is not inciting violence, criminality etc.
UK Corrupt Police is not intended to ‘please‘ police officers, on the other hand, the website does not incite violence or commit any other offence for that matter. What UK Corrupt police does intend, as protected by Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression, is to publish the wrongdoing of public servants however ‘irritating’ or ‘unwelcome’ this may be.
In the words of Lord Justice, “Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having“.