E-petition relating to penalties for offences arising from social media posts

E-petition 728715, created by Rupert Lowe MP (Independent), calls for the government to “urgently review the possible penalties for non-violent offences arising from social media posts, including the use of prison”. It states:

There is serious public concern about the proportionality of sentencing in cases involving opinion-based online speech. We believe imprisoning individuals for posts on social media sets a dangerous precedent and raises wider questions about freedom of expression, proportionality in sentencing, and the misuse of limited prison resources. We consider that alternative sanctions, such as fines or community service, would be more appropriate.

The petition has received over 190,000 signatures. It is scheduled for debate in Westminster Hall on 17 November 2025 at 4:30pm.

In its response to the petition, the government noted that freedom of expression was a “cornerstone of our democratic society”, adding:

…It is a long-standing tradition in this country that people are free to demonstrate their views, however uncomfortable these may be to the majority. The government is committed to protecting this right while also ensuring that laws are in place to address harmful, criminal behaviour.

On sentencing, the government’s response noted that the independent judiciary is responsible for passing sentence in individual cases, based on “the facts of each case and the relevant sentencing guidelines”. The response also noted that the government had commissioned an independent review of sentencing powers, which had “examined the full spectrum of sentencing options – from fines and community orders to custodial sentences – to ensure the framework is robust, proportionate, and fit for purpose”.

The government’s response said there were “currently no plans to review the penalties” for non-violent offences arising from social media posts.

Various offences can be committed by those who post (or share, for example by re-posting) material on social media. Relevant legislation includes the Public Order Act 1986, the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, the Online Safety Act 2023, the Communications Act 2003, and the Malicious Communications Act 1988.

Decisions as to whether to prosecute an individual (and if so, which offence(s) to charge them with) are a matter for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). The CPS should make these decisions in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors and any relevant offence-specific guidance, such as the CPS guidance on communications offences. The rights to peaceful protest and freedom of speech are factors that should be considered when the CPS is deciding whether it is in the public interest to prosecute.

If an individual is prosecuted and convicted, it will then be for the independent judiciary to sentence them. Parliament has fixed a maximum sentence for each of the offences most relevant to social media posts. The courts will sentence within the limits of these maximum sentences, following principles set out in sentencing guidelines issued by the Sentencing Council.

The government response to the e-petition refers to the role of the Online Safety Act 2023, which established a framework placing obligations on in-scope services (for example, social media platforms) to implement systems and processes to keep users safe from harmful and illegal content. The act also requires services to implement systems and processes to protect under-18s from age-inappropriate content. Ofcom can take enforcement action against services that fail to protect users as required by the act. The act does not regulate individual users (other than in relation to the communications offences in part 10 of the act).

Further details of the criminal law on social media posts are set out in section 2.1 of the debate pack, and the role of the Online Safety Act 2023 is discussed in section 2.2.