The suspects were prosecuted under laws criminalizing “offensive” speech online
Thousands of people in the UK have been detained and questioned by police over online posts deemed threatening or offensive, The Times has reported, citing custody data.
According to figures published on Friday, officers make around 12,000 arrests annually under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988. These laws criminalize causing distress by sending messages that are “grossly offensive,” or by sharing content of an “indecent, obscene or menacing character” via electronic communications networks.
In 2023 alone, officers from 37 police forces made 12,183 arrests – around 33 per day. The Times said this marks a 58% increase from 2019, when 7,734 arrests were recorded.
At the same time, government data shows that convictions and sentencings have dropped by nearly a half. While some cases were resolved through out-of-court settlements, the most commonly cited reason was “evidential difficulties,” particularly when victims declined to proceed.
The statistics have sparked public outcry, with civil liberties groups accusing the authorities of overpolicing the internet and undermining free speech through the use of “vague” communications laws.
The Times highlighted the case of Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine, who were arrested on January 29 after raising concerns in a private parents’ WhatsApp group about the hiring process of their daughter’s school. Six uniformed officers arrived at their home, detained them in front of their youngest child, and took them to a police station.
The couple was questioned on suspicion of harassment, malicious communications, and causing a nuisance on school property after the school alleged they had “cast aspersions” about the chair of governors. They were fingerprinted, searched, and locked in a cell for eight hours.
“It was hard to shake off the sense that I was living in a police state,” Allen told the Daily Mail, adding that the messages contained “no offensive language or threat” but were simply a “bit sarcastic.”
