Loyalist accused of inciting hatred has charge thrown out

Prominent loyalist David 'Dee' Stitt has won his legal battle to have a charge of inciting religious hatred thrown out of court.

Senior judges ruled on Wednesday there is no jurisdiction for the Magistrates' Court to deal with the case because a certificate of consent was not obtained from the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

The verdict ends current criminal proceedings brought against the 55-year-old community worker over a social media post in July 2024 about "the spread of evil Islam".

Stitt, of Lord Warden's Court in Bangor, Co Down, denied a count of publishing threatening, abusive or insulting material with intent to stir up hatred amid racial tensions at the time.

The charge was brought under Article 10 of the Public Order (Northern Ireland) Order 1987.

A posting shared on Stitt's Facebook page stated "enough is enough… get up and stand up" in response to the killing of three young girls in Southport, England.

Listing parts of Belfast, Newtownabbey and north Down where protests were to be held three days later, it stated: "The aim is to bring the country to a standstill."

Advice was given for women and children to be at the front of demonstrations at all locations.

The message also referred to having "one chance to stop the spread of evil Islam".

Detectives investigating the published material arrested Stitt at Belfast City Airport the following month.

He had just arrived back from a six-week stay in Alicante, where the material was allegedly posted.

Police and prosecutors described the publication as a "call to arms", claiming the intention was to incite fear or hatred of a group of people defined by religious belief.

During interviews Stitt told police the post was made on a private Facebook account he thought could only be seen by around 700 friends.

He insisted it was a reshare of a message sent to him about staging peaceful protests, and based on content written by someone else.

Stitt's legal team went to the Court of Appeal in a bid to have the case halted before any trial was heard at magistrates' level.

Under the 1987 Order a certificate of consent should have been obtained from the Director or Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), they contended.

The failure to honour those requirements was described as "fatal" for the case against the defendant.

Backing those submissions, appeal judges held today that the Magistrates' Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine a summary prosecution for an offence under Article 10 of the Order if there is no consent to prosecute from the DPP.

Lord Justice McCloskey confirmed: "It follows that the appeal is determined in favour of Mr Stitt."

Although prosecutors could still attempt to challenge the ruling at the Supreme Court, defence representatives indicated the current prosecution now appeared to be over.

Barrister John Larkin KC told the court: "It seems to us on this determination there can be no question of sending the case back (to the Magistrates' Court)."

Speaking later, Stitt's solicitor, Gavin Booth of Phoenix Law, stressed the current prosecution had ended.

He said: "We have always maintained that Mr Stitt's Facebook posting did not incite anybody to do anything.

"These proceedings were not properly initiated by the Public Prosecution Service, and we're happy that the Court of Appeal has ruled in our favour."

Stitt did not attend court for the judgment, but in a statement he claimed the case had involved an attempt to stymie free speech.

"I am proud to have fought this matter all the way to the Court of Appeal, and won," he said.

"Free speech is a fundamental part of the very foundation of the United Kingdom.

"This prosecution sought to stymie that and shut down discussion of some very important issues."

The statement, issued through loyalist activist Jamie Bryson's JWB Consultancy, added: "I look forward to celebrating with my family and getting on with my life after this unjust, and ultimately failed, persecution."