The argument that the UK has fallen into a police state can be constructed from the evidence presented in the article,
focusing on the significant increase in arrests for online speech, the vague nature of the laws being enforced, and the disproportionate police response to relatively minor offenses.
First, the sheer volume of arrests—over 12,000 in 2023, equating to 33 per day—under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988, suggests a level of surveillance and intervention that is hallmarks of a police state. These laws target messages causing "annoyance," "inconvenience," or "anxiety," terms that are inherently subjective and open to broad interpretation. The 58% rise in arrests since 2019 indicates an escalating trend of policing online behavior, which critics like Jake Hurfurt from Big Brother Watch argue is "seriously concerning" and a threat to free expression. In a police state, authorities often expand their reach into personal freedoms under vague pretexts, and this data suggests the UK is trending in that direction.
Second, the nature of specific cases underscores police overreach, a key characteristic of authoritarian control. The arrest of Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine by Hertfordshire police—where six officers detained a couple for eight hours over emails and WhatsApp comments about a school—illustrates a disproportionate response to what appears to be a civil dispute rather than a criminal threat. Even Chief Constable Andy Prophet admitted hindsight showed a less heavy-handed approach could have sufficed, yet the initial action was justified as "lawful." This incident, coupled with the threat to treat elected officials advocating for the couple as harassment suspects, hints at a system where dissent or criticism is met with intimidation, a tactic often seen in police states to silence opposition.
Third, the disconnect between arrests and convictions, only 1,119 sentencings in 2023 compared to 12,183 arrests, raises questions about the legitimacy and necessity of these detentions. The drop in convictions by nearly half since 2015, despite rising arrests, suggests many cases lack sufficient evidence or public support for prosecution, as "evidential difficulties" and victim reluctance are cited as primary reasons. This pattern could indicate that police are casting a wide net, detaining individuals pre-emptively or punitively rather than pursuing justice, a practice aligned with police state tactics where the act of arrest itself serves as punishment or deterrence.
Moreover, civil liberties advocates like Toby Young of the Free Speech Union point to specific prosecutions, like David Wootton's conviction for a tasteless Halloween costume posted online, as evidence of "over-zealous" policing of speech. Young contrasts this focus on "hurty words" with the police's declining success rate in solving violent and sexual offenses (only 11% closed with a suspect caught or charged), arguing that resources are being misallocated to suppress expression rather than protect public safety. In a police state, priorities often shift from genuine security to controlling narratives and behavior, and this misallocation could be seen as symptomatic of such a shift.
Finally, the lack of transparency from some forces, such as Police Scotland, and the variation in arrest rates (e.g., Leicestershire's 83 per 100,000) suggest an uneven but pervasive application of these powers across the UK. Combined with the chilling effect described by Hurfurt—where fear of arrest stifles online discourse—this paints a picture of a society where free speech, a cornerstone of democracy, is increasingly curtailed under the guise of maintaining order. While the UK on paper retains democratic institutions, the expansion of police authority into the digital realm, enabled by vague laws and unchecked by consistent judicial outcomes, mirrors the erosion of personal liberties seen in police states.
The UK's trajectory toward a police state can be seen through the lens of rampant arrests for online speech, heavy-handed individual cases, low conviction rates despite high detention numbers, and a focus on minor offenses over serious crimes, all underpinned by laws that invite subjective enforcement. This suggests a creeping authoritarianism where the state prioritises control over expression rather than safeguarding freedom.
"The police are making more than 30 arrests a day over offensive posts on social media and other platforms.
Thousands of people are being detained and questioned for sending messages that cause "annoyance", "inconvenience" or "anxiety" to others via the internet, telephone or mail.
Custody data obtained by The Times shows that officers are making about 12,000 arrests a year under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988.
The acts make it illegal to cause distress by sending "grossly offensive" messages or sharing content of an "indecent, obscene or menacing character" on an electronic communications network.
Officers from 37 police forces made 12,183 arrests in 2023, the equivalent of about 33 per day. This marks an almost 58 per cent rise in arrests since before the pandemic. In 2019, forces logged 7,734 detentions.
The statistics have provoked criticism from civil liberties groups that the authorities are over-policing the internet and threatening free speech using "vague" communications laws.
As director of public prosecutions, Sir Keir Starmer issued Crown Prosecution Service guidance stating that offensive social media messages should only lead to prosecution in "extreme circumstances".
Analysis of government data shows that the number of convictions and sentencings for communications offences has dramatically decreased over the past decade.
According to Ministry of Justice figures, there were 1,119 sentencings for Section 127 and Section 1 offences in 2023, down by almost half since 2015 when 1,995 people were found guilty of the crimes.
There are several reasons for arrests not resulting in sentencing, such as out-of-court resolutions. But the most common is "evidential difficulties", specifically that the victim does not support taking further action.
There has been an outcry about police "overreach" and fears that officers could be "curtailing democracy" by arresting people for malicious communications offences.
The Times reported last week that Hertfordshire police sent six officers to detain a couple and put them in a cell for eight hours after their child's primary school objected to the volume of emails they sent and "disparaging" comments made in a WhatsApp group.
Maxie Allen, 50, and Rosalind Levine, 46, were questioned on suspicion of harassment, malicious communications and causing a nuisance on school property. After a five-week investigation, the police concluded that there should be no further action.
A police officer also said that elected officials could be treated as harassment suspects if they continued advocating for the couple.
Andy Prophet, chief constable of Hertfordshire, defended the arrests, saying that the force had given warnings and they were lawful, although he conceded that "with the benefit of hindsight we could have achieved the same ends in a different way".
According to the data obtained by The Times, the force with the highest number of arrests in 2023 was the Metropolitan Police (1,709), the largest force in the UK, followed by West Yorkshire (963) and Thames Valley (939). However, when adjusted for population, Leicestershire police had the highest rate of arrests per 100,000 with 83. Cumbria police was second (58) and Northamptonshire police third (50).
The total arrest figures are likely to be far higher because eight forces failed to respond to freedom of information requests or provided inadequate data, including Police Scotland, the second largest force in the UK. Some forces also included arrests for "threatening" messages, though these do not fall under the specified sections.
Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch, a civil liberties group, said the increase of arrests for communications offences is "seriously concerning".
He said: "Police look to be wasting countless hours on arresting people for posting things online that, while offensive, are not illegal. Heavy-handed use of vague communications offences is a threat to everyone's freedom to express themselves online.
"Police must remember that free speech is a right, and only intervene when absolutely necessary, because needless arrests for social media posts have a chilling effect that will cause the decline of our democratic culture.
"These statistics are seriously concerning and the home secretary should instigate an independent review into police arrests for online speech and the health of free expression in the UK."
Toby Young, the founder and director of the Free Speech Union, said his organisation was helping half a dozen people who were being prosecuted for section 127 or section 1 offences.
They include David Wootton, 40, who is appealing against a conviction for dressing up as the Manchester Arena bomber, Salman Abedi, for a Halloween party last year.
He had posted images on social media showing him wearing an Arabic-style headdress, and the slogan "I love Ariana Grande" on his T-shirt, and carrying a rucksack with "Boom" and "TNT" written on the front. Wootton was arrested and admitted sending an offensive message online. He faces up to two years in prison.
Young accused police forces of being "over-zealous in pursuing people for alleged speech crimes".
He added: "Given that only 11 per cent of the violent and sexual offence cases in England and Wales were closed after a suspect was caught or charged in the year to June 2024, a steep decline on previous years, it seems extraordinary that the police are wasting so much time arresting people for hurty words.
"Sir Keir Starmer emphatically denied there is a free speech crisis in Britain when JD Vance raised this with him at the White House, but this data suggests we have a serious problem."
A suspect arrested on suspicion of malicious communications may have also been arrested on suspicion of other linked offences. So while they might not have been sentenced for that offence, they might for another offence if it was part of the same incident.
A spokeswoman for Leicestershire police said crimes under Section 127 and Section 1 include "any form of communication" such as phone calls, letters, emails and hoax calls to emergency services.
"They may also be serious domestic abuse-related crimes. Our staff must assess all of the information to determine if the threshold to record a crime has been met.
"Where a malicious communications offence is believed to have taken place, appropriate action will be taken. Our staff must consider whether the communication may be an expression which would be considered to be freedom of speech. While it may be unacceptable to be rude or offensive it is not unlawful — unless the communication is 'grossly offensive'.
"Freedom of speech is enshrined within our society, and while communications may be rude, impolite or offensive, they may not be unlawful. Decisions are made taking this into consideration and if found not to be unlawful, will not be recorded as a crime."
Other police forces deferred to the National Police Chiefs' Council, which did not provide a comment."