JK Rowling will not be prosecuted after her criticism of a transgender law in Scotland

The British writer is one of the most influential opponents of the movement to recognize the rights of trans people because she sees it as an attack on women’s rights.

The author of the Harry Potter saga J. K. Rowling will not be prosecuted for having strongly criticized on social networks a new Scottish law, supposed to better protect trans people, but which she considers contrary to freedom of expression, indicated the police Tuesday April 2. This text, which entered into force on Monday, strengthens existing legislation on incitement to hatred and broadens the associated offense to include transphobia in particular.

But for the novelist who lives in Edinburgh, this text opens the door wide to “abuse from activists who want to silence those of us who speak out about the dangers of removing women’s spaces”she denounced in a series of messages published on X (ex-Twitter) Monday. “Freedom of speech and belief are over in Scotland if accurate description of biological sex” is seen as a criminal offense, she added.

She then challenged Scottish police to arrest her, saying that if her comments were “considered as an offense under the terms of the new law”, she had “can’t wait to be arrested” upon his return to the country after a trip abroad.

His comments are “not considered criminal”

The Scottish police, who said they had received several complaints against the author, however assured Tuesday through a spokesperson that J. K. Rowling’s comments “were not considered criminals and would not be subject to any action.”

The author of this bestselling saga has become one of the most influential opponents of the trans rights movement, seeing it as an attack on women’s rights, and a vehement critic of the Scottish government’s position on the subject. .

Scotland wants to be a pioneering nation in defending the rights of these people, and adopted a law at the end of 2022 facilitating gender change. This text has since been blocked by London, which feared “significant complications” within the British legislative system.