A CIVIL liberties group suggested today that Home Secretary Suella Braveman could weaponise the recently passed Online Safety Bill to censor Palestine flags online.

Open Rights Group (ORG) has been heavily critical of the Bill, which it says could undermine free speech and threaten the right to assembly. 

ORG says that the Bill mandates social media companies to identify and swiftly remove illegal content to prevent their users from “encountering” it. 

This will likely be done through a filter, which will scan posts as they are uploaded.

Under these rules, the content will be deemed illegal according to criminal offences, such as those listed under Section 5 of the Public Order Act. 

This section prohibits any written text, symbol, or other visible expression that is “menacing and likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to someone within earshot or view.”

It was this part of the act that was referred to last week, when Ms Braverman wrote a letter to chief constables asserting that waving a Palestinian flag or singing a chant advocating freedom for Arabs in the region could be a criminal offence. 

“Context is crucial. Behaviours that are legitimate in some circumstances, for example, the waving of a Palestinian flag, may not be legitimate such as when intended to glorify acts of terrorism,” the letter said.

Ms Braverman made it clear that her directive to law enforcement encompassed online conduct as well.

Jim Killock, executive director of Open Rights Group, responded with concerns for freedom of expression: “ORG condemns the harassment of Jewish people.

“Jewish people must be protected from any threats and must be able to feel safe. 

“However, we are concerned that Suella Braverman’s letter represents political interference into policing, which could have consequences for people’s freedom of expression in the UK.

“We are particularly concerned about the consequences of such a letter when the Online Safety Bill is implemented. 

“The Bill compels tech companies to prevent users from encountering illegal content, meaning they must use algorithms to scan posts before uploading them. 

“A broad directive such as this could lead tech companies to remove any posts featuring a Palestinian flag, which could have a chilling effect on freedom of expression.”

Censoring images of flags, such as those from protests, could also have a totalitarian impact on media coverage.

ORG policy manager Dr Monica Horten argued that it is “within the realm of possibility that photographs and videos of people holding up a placard, if identified as an offence under Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, could be removed before it has even been uploaded.”

Referring to footage of Republic activists being arrested during Charles Windsor’s coronation, ORG wrote on its website that the incident “sparked outrage on social media, international media interest and political debate of the police’s actions.

“It could have been a very different story if these images had been removed by tech platforms before they were even posted.”