Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Submit Guest Post

‘Prosecute anti-vaxxers’

By Amit Roy

IT IS one thing for individuals to say they don’t want to take the Covid vaccine, however wrong that decision might be.


But for conspiracy theorists to spread or retweet misinformation with a view to discouraging others from taking the jab should surely be treated as a criminal offence.

Shouldn’t such people be pros­ecuted in the way that they would be if they were terrorists groom­ing gullible people?

I accept the two are not quite the same thing, but free speech cannot be used as an excuse to harm other people’s lives.

The home secretary Priti Patel was absolutely right in telling so­cial media platforms such as Fa­cebook, Twitter and YouTube that they have a responsibility to take down anti-vaccination content and wider misinformation about the coronavirus pandemic.

During a visit to a vaccination centre in north London, she said: “I would say to social media com­panies, ‘do your own bit, take re­sponsibility, pull down misinfor­mation and disinformation,’ and ‘there’s no harm in them actually linking a lot of their stuff to the NHS and gov.uk’.”

In the past few weeks, there have been many discussions on why there has been a problem with vaccine take-up in some sec­tions of the ethnic minorities.

Everyone is agreed that it would be counterproductive to make vaccinations compulsory. But that does not mean conspira­cy theorists should be free to al­lege vaccines affect fertility, change human DNA, put a micro­chip into people, contain “halal” products or similar nonsense.

Back in November last year, the Metropolitan Police assistant commissioner, Neil Basu, had said there should be a discussion about whether it was “the correct thing for society to allow” people to spread “misinformation that could cost people’s lives”.

He stopped short of endorsing a new law, but suggested: “There is a debate for society to have about free speech and responsi­bility and people who are spread­ing misinformation that could cost people’s lives... whether that is the correct thing for this society to allow to happen.”

Officials said one reason for his concern was that Islamist and far-right groups were using false claims about coronavirus to radi­calise followers.

I am pleased the celebrity video put together by Adil Ray, encour­aging Asians and people from African-Caribbean backgrounds to take the vaccine, is going to be given wider circulation.

The government should persist with messaging targeted at ethnic minorities. But it should now go beyond that and take active steps to prosecute the anti-vaxxers. The basic principle is that conspiracy theorists should not abuse demo­cratic freedoms to harm others.

Add EasternEye As Your Trusted Source
preferred source on google news

More For You

How much academic freedom should racists enjoy?

A copy of the Jason Arday book "Great and Unfortunate Things" is displayed for sale in a bookshop window on August 27, 2026 in London, England.

Getty Images

How much academic freedom should racists enjoy?

Sunder Katwala

How far should academic freedom protect racist research? The question divides academics in Europe, Britain and the United States. Ghent University in Belgium is the epicentre of the latest furore – but with an umbilical link to Cambridge, and the recent controversy and tragedy of Professor Jason Arday.

Dr Nathan Cofnas describes himself as a “race realist”: a term chosen to spin for his belief that biological racism is true. Cofnas argues that there are innate genetic differences in intelligence – and brain size too – between ethnic groups, such as whites, blacks and Asians. He claims that a dozen heretics share his beliefs. Yet the academic consensus is that race science and eugenics have been comprehensively debunked.

Keep ReadingShow less