Which UK laws most commonly led to arrests for social media posts in 2024 (e.g., harassment, hate speech, terrorism)?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The arrests for social-media posts in the UK in 2024 were driven overwhelmingly by a trio of communications and public‑order offences — section 127 of the Communications Act 2003, section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988, and harassment offences (including racially or religiously aggravated variants) — alongside new criminal provisions brought into force by Part 10 of the Online Safety Act 2023; these categories appear repeatedly in police FOIs, parliamentary briefings and reporting [1] [2] [3] [4]. Data gaps and differing recording practices at police forces, however, mean headline arrest totals are often aggregated by offence group and are not a clean measure of prosecutions or convictions, a limitation flagged in official commentary and FOI replies [3] [5] [2].
1. The legal pillars: Communications Act 2003 and Malicious Communications Act 1988
The most commonly cited statutes used to arrest people for online posts are section 127 of the Communications Act 2003, which criminalises sending “grossly offensive, obscene, indecent or menacing” messages via public electronic communications, and section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988, which targets messages intended to cause distress or anxiety; both are explicitly named across reporting and official guidance as the backbone of online‑speech enforcement [1] [3] [4].
2. Harassment and racially/religiously aggravated offences — the other big bucket
Police FOI disclosures show thousands of arrests recorded under offence codes described as harassment (8L), racially or religiously aggravated harassment (8M) and malicious communications (8R), with one force reporting 24,703 arrests in those groups in the period covered and at least 1,533 records that explicitly referenced platforms like Facebook, Twitter or Instagram (West Yorkshire FOI) [2]. That mix reflects how many social‑media cases are processed: not always as a standalone “communications” charge but under broader harassment or hate‑crime legislation.
3. New statutory tools since 2024: Online Safety Act Part 10
Part 10 of the Online Safety Act 2023 came into force on 31 January 2024 and introduced new communication offences — including niche offences such as “epilepsy trolling” (sending flashing images intending harm) — that prosecutors and guidance now recognise as part of the toolkit for online content enforcement, meaning arrests in 2024 could also be framed under this newer statute [3].
4. Scale, interpretation and the prosecution gap
Press reporting and advocacy groups have produced dramatic arrest figures — for example, coverage that police make “over 30 arrests a day” for offensive online messages and that thousands were detained in 2023 — but those tallies mix different offences and do not equate to charges, prosecutions or convictions; the Home Office and CPS publish data at different levels of granularity, FOIs show forces vary in how they record social‑media involvement, and independent fact‑checks note imprisonment remains relatively rare compared with arrests [6] [3] [5] [7].
5. Debate, civil‑liberties concerns and policing practice
Civil‑liberties bodies and free‑speech campaigners argue that vague wording in these statutes has produced over‑policing of offensive speech online, while police and prosecutors counter that the laws are needed to address threats, harassment and material that can lead to real harm; media coverage and organisations such as the Free Speech Union have amplified the scale of arrests as evidence of a chilling effect, whereas official guidance from the CPS urges restraint and to pursue prosecutions only in “extreme circumstances” [4] [6] [3]. Importantly, several sources warn that the data picture is uneven — individual forces may prioritize different crimes and the headline arrest numbers are sensitive to local policing priorities and recording practices [2] [5] [3].