news-2


New Hate Crime Bill – the freedom to disagree must be protected, say Scotland’s Bishops 
Wednesday 29 July 2020

The Bishops’ Conference of Scotland has responded to the Scottish Government’s new Hate Crime and Public Order Bill. In a submission to the Scottish Parliament Justice Committee the Conference has stated that any new law must be ‘carefully weighed against fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of thought, conscience and religion.’
 
The bill proposes to modernise, consolidate and extend hate crime legislation in Scotland, including introducing a new offence of stirring up hatred, possession of inflammatory material, and new protection of freedom of expression provisions in relation to religion and sexual orientation. 
 
Commenting on the submission, the Director of the Catholic Parliamentary Office, Anthony Horan said;

“Whilst acknowledging that stirring up of hatred is morally wrong and supporting moves to discourage and condemn such behaviour the bishops have expressed concerns about the lack of clarity around definitions and a potentially low threshold for committing an offence, which they fear, could lead to a ‘deluge of vexatious claims’.” 
 
“A new offence of possessing inflammatory material could even render material such as the Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic Church...inflammatory.  The Catholic Church’s understanding of the human person, including the belief that sex and gender are not fluid and changeable, could fall foul of the new law. Allowing for respectful debate, means avoiding censorship and accepting the divergent views and multitude of arguments inhabiting society.”

Mr Horan added;
 
“The Church believes that fundamental freedoms must be protected, as the right to exercise freedom, especially in moral and religious matters, is ‘an inalienable requirement of the dignity of the human person’ and ‘a right that must be recognised and protected by civil authority, always within the limits of the common good and public order’. The courts have noted that the freedom to shock, offend and disturb, as well as the contentious and unwelcome are protected by the right to freedom of expression, and the bishops have declared that freedom of expression provisions must be robust enough to protect the freedom to disagree.

Mr Horan concluded;
 
“The bishops decry so-called ‘cancel culture’ in their submission, expressing deep concern at the ‘hunting down of those who disagree with prominent orthodoxies with the intention to expunge the non-compliant from public discourse and with callous disregard for their livelihoods’. They say that ‘no single section of society has dominion over acceptable and unacceptable speech or expression’ and urged the law to be proportionate and fair and allow for respectful debate and tolerance lest we become an ‘intolerant, illiberal society’.”

ENDS

Peter Kearney 
Director 
Catholic Media Office 
0141 221 1168
07968 122291 
pk@scmo.org 
www.scmo.org


Note to Editors:

The full text of the submission to the consultation is shown below:




Catholic Church responds to Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill Consultation


Justice Committee – Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill


Consolidation
2.    The Bill brings together the majority of existing hate crime laws into one piece of legislation. Do you believe there is merit in the consolidation of existing hate crime laws and should all such laws be covered?

We agree that there is merit in consolidating existing hate crime laws.




Other forms of crime not included in the Bill
5.    Do you think that sectarianism should have been specifically addressed in this Bill and defined in hate crime legislation? For example, should a statutory aggravation relating to sectarianism or a standalone offence have been created and added?

Existing legislation, including existing statutory aggravations, adequately covers offences relating to sectarianism. 

We agree with Lord Bracadale that the absence of such an aggravation would not leave a gap in the law as both race and religion statutory aggravations can be attached to any base offence if proven.  


Stirring up offences
6.    Do you have views on the merits of Part 2 of the Bill and the plans to introduce a new offence of stirring up of hatred?

As expressed in Lord Bracadale’s report into hate crime in Scotland, criminalising conduct is a serious step that should not be taken lightly. And any new law must be carefully weighed against fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

There is no argument with the proposition that stirring up of hatred is morally wrong. Furthermore, there is no argument with the reasonable belief that stirring up of hatred may lead to violence, public disorder, and may incite others to commit offences.

To create an offence whereby this kind of conduct is discouraged and condemned is a positive move. However, this must be balanced against existing legislation. It must also be balanced with fundamental freedoms, and the terminology used in any new law must accurately capture the offending behaviour being criminalised. The law must also be sufficiently clear for society to understand it and for the judiciary to be able to apply it. In terms of balancing fundamental freedoms, we have set out our response in our answer to question 8.

The provisions of the proposed new stirring up offence consist of a two-part test. Sections 3(1) and 3(2) set out that, for an offence to be established, the behaviour or communication must be threatening or abusive (or insulting in the case of race). This is the first part of the test. The second part of the test is that by this behaviour or communication, the person ’intends’ to stir up hatred against a group of persons (with a protected characteristic), or there is a ‘likelihood’ that hatred will be stirred up against such a group. How hatred is defined is not clear which leaves it open to wide interpretation. This could lead to vexatious claims having to be dealt with by police.

The proposed threshold for an offence under the stirring up provisions might also be considered disproportionately low. For example, A might disagree with B’s belief that a biological male cannot become a woman. A might even go so far as to say that B is ‘talking nonsense’ and that he is ‘transphobic’ and say so either in person or on a social media platform such as Twitter. The term abusive includes being offensive or mistreating and B feeling offended against, the first test is met. In terms of the second test, a group of people accompanying B deem the comments to be an intention to stir up hatred against them as a group, and thus the second test is met.

The behaviour of A should not be criminalised and criminal liability should not be determined solely on the subjective. The test must be stronger and allow the law to be consistent and not forever stretched in multiple ways to meet the capricious sensibilities and mores of the current culture and public opinion.

Further, the introduction of an offence of ‘likelihood’ (sections 1(b)(ii) and 2(b)(ii)) removes the mens rea (mental) element; a critical aspect of the common law test of criminal liability in Scots law.

An approach which may strike a better balance between the type of behaviour which ought to be criminalised and the public interest and fundamental freedoms is the ‘hypothetical reasonable person’, as prescribed in section 38 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010, and remarked on in Paterson v Harvie.

Section 38 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 provides that a person commits an offence if he behaves in a threatening and abusive manner and the behaviour would be likely to cause a reasonable person to suffer fear or alarm, and he intends by the behaviour to cause fear and alarm or is reckless as to whether the behaviour would cause fear or alarm.

In Paterson v Harvie [2014] HCJAC 87 it was held on appeal that the ‘essence of the offence under section 38 was that the accused’s conduct was to be judged by an objective test in which the actual effect of the threatening or abusive behaviour on those who experienced it was irrelevant and if the objective test was met the crime was complete if the accused’s behaviour would be likely to cause fear and alarm to the hypothetical [reasonable] person.’ The reasonable person, it is remarked, is ‘someone who is not of abnormal sensitivity.’

This test is both proportionate and clear and thus less susceptible to wide interpretation and a deluge of vexatious claims.

We are also concerned that section 5 of the Bill creates an offence of possessing inflammatory material which, if taken with the low threshold contained therein, could render material such as the Bible, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and other texts such as Bishops’ Conference of Scotland submissions to government consultations, as being inflammatory under the new provision. For example, in a recent submission to the Scottish Government on proposed reform of the Gender Recognition Act 2004, the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland stated the Catholic Church’s understanding of the human person, including the belief that sex and gender are not fluid and changeable, and that male and female are complementary and ordered towards the creation of new life. Such pronouncements, which are widely held, might be perceived by others as an abuse of their own, personal worldview and likely to stir up hatred.

We cannot turn to censorship but must instead accept the divergent views and multitude of arguments inhabiting our society on a wide range of issues and allow for respectful debate.


7.    Do you have any views on the Scottish Government’s plans to retain the threshold of ‘threatening, abusive or insulting’ behaviour in relation to the stirring up of racial hatred, contrary to Lord Bracadale’s views that ‘insulting’ should be removed?

Racial hatred is a grave offence that is to be condemned. The equal dignity of all human beings demands that we strive for fairer and more humane conditions for all people and that every form of social or cultural discrimination in fundamental personal rights on the grounds of race, sex, social conditions, or religion among others, must be curbed and eradicated.

We agree with Lord Bracadale’s conclusion that the stirring up of racial hatred offences be limited to threatening or abusive conduct or material. As outlined in Lord Bracadale’s report, the term ‘insulting’ was removed from an English harassment offence (s5 of the Public Order Act 1986) on the basis that ‘threatening or abusive’ sufficiently covered the type of conduct being targeted. Additionally, it was argued that its removal would not undermine the ability of the prosecution service to bring prosecutions. Removal of the term ‘insulting’ in the Scottish context would also ensure consistency across all protected characteristics.


There is also a danger that the inclusion of nationality (including citizenship) and national origins (section 3(1)) might censor some of the discussions which take place around important constitutional issues such as Scottish independence and exiting the European Union. By definition, insulting behaviour might include conduct which is insolent or causes affront. Constitutional debates are often robust and include a blunt exchange of views, which might be considered an affront by some. Consideration ought to be given to how the freedom to engage in robust and frank debate on political issues such as constitutional arguments can be protected and not fall foul of the provisions of the bill.


Other issues
8.    Do you have any comments on what should be covered by the ‘protection of freedom of expression’ provision in the Bill?

Any new law must be carefully weighed against fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of thought, conscience and religion. The right to exercise freedom, especially in moral and religious matters, is an inalienable requirement of the dignity of the human person. It is a right that must be recognised and protected by civil authority, always within the limits of the common good and public order.

Importantly the courts have expressly noted that the right to freedom of expression protects facts and opinion; and it protects expression which shocks, offends and disturbs other people. It also protects the contentious and the unwelcome. Freedom of expression provisions must be robust enough to protect the freedom to disagree.

Society must protect the right to freedom of expression across all protected characteristics and avoid singling out specific characteristics and creating a hierarchy of rights and freedoms. The right to freedom of expression is always balanced, and correctly so, against the duties and responsibilities set out in Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

As per our answer to question 6, a recent Bishops’ Conference of Scotland submission to the Scottish Government on proposed reform of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 set out the Catholic Church’s understanding of the human person, including the belief that sex and gender are not fluid and changeable, and that male and female are complementary and ordered towards the creation of new life. Without an appropriate freedom of expression provision such pronouncements, which are widely held, would not be protected.

Prominent public figures have been accused of hate and of transphobia for making the argument that a man cannot become a woman and vice versa. Many have also been accused of hate for using pronouns corresponding with an individual’s biological or birth sex. The freedom to express these arguments and beliefs must be protected.

The growth of what some describe as the ‘cancel culture’ - hunting down those who disagree with prominent orthodoxies with the intention to expunge the non-compliant from public discourse and with callous disregard for their livelihoods - is deeply concerning.

No single section of society has dominion over acceptable and unacceptable speech or expression. Whilst the legislature and judiciary must create and interpret laws to maintain public order it must do so carefully, weighing in fundamental freedoms and allowing for reasonably held views, the expression of which is not intended to cause harm.

As stated in response to question 6, we cannot turn to censorship but must instead accept the divergent views and multitude of arguments inhabiting our society on a wide range of issues and allow for respectful debate and expect respectful tolerance. This does not mean anything goes. The law must provide red lines, but it must be proportionate and fair. Otherwise we risk becoming an intolerant, illiberal society.



10. What is your view on the plans for the abolition of the offence of blasphemy?

We have no objection to the plans to abolish the common law of blasphemy in Scotland. .



_____________________________
Change email address / Leave mailing list: http://ymlp.com/u.php?id=guumemsg
Powered by YourMailingListProvider

Subscribe to Updates

Subscribe to:
Like   Back to Top   Seen 251 times   Liked 0 times

Subscribe to Updates

If you enjoyed this, why not subscribe to free email updates ?

Subscribe to News updates

Enter your email address to be notified of new posts:

Subscribe to:

Alternatively, you can subscribe via RSS RSS

‹ Return to News

We never share or sell your email address to anyone.

I've already subscribed / don't show me this again

Recent Posts

Statement on nuclear weapons from the Bishops of Scotland and England & Wales

| 5 days ago | Blogging

Statement on nuclear weapons from the Bishops of Scotland and England & Wales Tuesday 4 August 2020   During his historic visit to Japan last year, Pope Francis declared that “the use of atomic energy for purposes of war is immoral, just as the possession of atomic weapons is immoral”. Seventy-five years on from the unprecedented and horrific destruction of life at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we are called to reflect prayerfully upon the UK’s own possession of nuclear weapons.   Pope Francis reiterated that the threat of mutual destruction, the massive loss of innocent lives and the annihilation of any future for our common home, is completely incompatible with our efforts to build peace. “If we really want to build a more just and secure society, we must let the weapons fall from our hands”, said the Pope.   He also reminded us that it is unjust to continue squandering precious resources on manufacturing, maintaining and upgrading ever more destructive technology. The cost of nuclear weapons should be measured not only in the lives destroyed through their use, but also the suffering of the poorest and most vulnerable people, who could have benefited were such vast sums of public money invested in the Common Good of society instead. The Scottish and English and Welsh bishops' conferences have in the past called on the UK government to forsake its own nuclear weapons.    We therefore recommit ourselves to the abolition of these weapons and to the Holy Father’s call to pray each day “for the conversion of hearts and for the triumph of a culture of life, reconciliation and fraternity. A fraternity that can recognize and respect diversity in the quest for a common destiny.”    +William Nolan,  Bishop of Galloway and on behalf of the Commission for Justice and Peace of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland.   +Declan Lang,  Bishop of Clifton and Chairman of the international Affairs Department of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales    ENDS   Peter Kearney Director Catholic Media Office 0141 221 116807968 122291 pk@scmo.org www.scmo.org  ...

A New Lectionary for Scotland

| 24th July 2020 | Blogging

A New Lectionary for Scotland 24 July 2020 Scotland’s Catholic Bishops have approved the preparation of a new Lectionary (a book of readings used at Mass) to update and replace the three volume Lectionary in use in the dioceses of England and Wales, Scotland and Ireland for almost 30 years. The current Lectionary was first published in 1981 using the Jerusalem Bible (1966) as its base text. Commenting on the publication, Bishop Hugh Gilbert, President of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland said; “In reaching a decision about a translation for the Lectionary, the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland itself considered the values they would most expect a Lectionary to embody, for example, accuracy, dignity, facility of proclamation, and accessibility. The Catholic Edition of the English Standard Version (ESV) Bible, published in 2018, will be used as the base text for the new translation, it has been accepted by the Bishops of England and Wales as the basis for their own Lectionary and the Scottish Bishops voted at their July 2020 meeting to use it as well. It makes practical and pastoral good sense for the same translation to be used in Scotland, England and Wales.” Bishop Gilbert added; “The National Liturgy Commission has looked closely at the issue of a new Lectionary and hope that its publication will keep the biblical word alive and active for the holy People of God and shape thought and culture in our changing world.” ENDS Peter Kearney 
Director 
Catholic Media Office 
0141 221 1168
07968 122291 
pk@scmo.org 
www.scmo.org Note to Editors: 1. The work of editing and publishing the new Lectionary is expected to take several years. 2. A full statement on the new Lectionary from the National Liturgy Commission is shown below. The Lectionary and the Word of God The Church, throughout her history, sets before the faithful the riches of Sacred Scripture to be read and broken open in worship and for use in private devotions. The Second Vatican Council, in an effort to restore the practice of the early centuries of the Church of a continuous reading of a breadth of Scripture,  promulgated a new lectionary for the Roman Rite, with a revised structure and a wide selection of Scripture texts. St Paul writes: “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim 3:16-17). Thus, the Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures as she venerated the Body of the Lord, in so far as she never ceases, particularly in the sacred liturgy, to partake of the bread of life and to offer it to the faithful from the one table of the Word of God and the Body of Christ (Dei Verbum, 21). By listening to and understanding the Scriptures we encounter God and understand how he reveals himself to us, enabling us to grow in faith. But we do not listen alone. Through a faithful proclamation of the word of God within the tradition of the Church we benefit from the holiness and wisdom of all the faithful who have gone before us. According to the General Introduction to the Lectionary: through his word, God unceasingly calls to mind and extends the plan of salvation, which achieves its fullest expression in the liturgy. The liturgical celebration becomes therefore the continuing, complete, and effective presentation of God’s word. Developments leading to a revised translation of the Lectionary The three volume Lectionary in use in the dioceses of England and Wales, Scotland and Ireland was first published in 1981 using the Jerusalem Bible (1966) and the Grail Psalms (1963). It was subsequently re-printed, although is presently out of print. In recent times, English-speaking Bishops’ Conferences worldwide have approved a new translation of the Book of Psalms – “The Abbey Psalms” – for the Liturgy of the Hours. This new translation is the w...

Catholic Bishops announce resumption of communal worship

| 09th July 2020 | Blogging

Thursday 9 July 2020Catholic Bishops announce resumption of communal worshipScotland’s Catholic Bishops have welcomed the First Minister’s comments today (Thursday 9 July) on places of worship and have announced the resumption of communal worship in Catholic parishes from 15 July. Commenting on the move, the President of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland, Bishop Hugh Gilbert said;“Over the past month, our parishes have been preparing for the safe resumption of communal prayer and the celebration of Mass, which is at the centre of the life of the church. To have been unable to attend Mass for many months has been a source of real sadness for Scotland’s Catholics and I am sure there will be great joy at the prospect of returning.”“Thanks to the widespread implementation of the church’s Infection Control protocols, Catholic parishes will begin the resumption of public Masses and other communal activities from 15 July.”Bishop Gilbert added;“The bishops are extremely grateful to all those who have worked tirelessly to prepare our parishes for public worship and to those who made their views known to their parliamentary representatives and the government on the subject of communal worship.While thanking the Scottish Government for listening to these calls, we would remind parishioners that the obligation to attend Sunday Mass remains suspended and ask those who return to do so in accordance with the infection control measures in force in each parish, mindful always of the need to protect themselves and others.”ENDS Peter Kearney 
Director 
Catholic Media Office 
0141 221 1168
07968 122291 
pk@scmo.org 
www.scmo.orgNote to Editors:The Infection Control Working Group’s Report can be viewed here:https://www.bcos.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/COVID-19%20Infection%20Control%20Advice%20230620.pdf...

Bishops welcome Review Group’s Annual report

| 26th June 2020 | Blogging

Bishops welcome Review Group’s Annual report Friday 26 June 2020   The Second Annual Report of the Independent Review Group (IRG) monitoring the implementation of the recommendations of the McLellan Commission by the Catholic Church in Scotland has been welcomed by the Bishops’ Conference. The report, published on 26 June is available at: https://www.bcos.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/IRG%20Report%20June%202020.pdf   Commenting on the publication, Bishop Joseph Toal, President of the Commission for Pastoral and Social Care said;“On behalf of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland, I thank the IRG for their work and welcome the publication of their second annual report, which will be given careful consideration.”   Bishop Toal added;   “Safeguarding remains at the heart of the church’s mission and the maintenance of high standards is only possible through independent scrutiny of an autonomous body like the IRG that works separately from the Catholic Church.”   ENDS Peter Kearney Director Catholic Media Office 0141 221 116807968 122291 pk@scmo.org www.scmo.org      ...