The Chair of the Scottish Police Authority’s watchdog has said that the controversial hate crime law, which will come into effect on April 1st, risks having a “chilling effect” on freedom of speech.
Katharina Kasper, chairwoman of the Scottish Police Authority’s complaints and conduct committee, said at a Police Authority meeting that: “The concerns that have been expressed are that by the time an allegation is made and an investigation starts, the process itself can become a punishment which may have a chilling effect on the freedom of expression”.
She told Chief Constable of Police Scotland, Jo Farrell, that “credible voices across the judicial sector and human rights organisations” do not believe that sufficient safeguards have been put in place to protect freedom of speech, according to a report in The Times.
The Scottish law criminalises threatening or abusive behaviour which is intended to stir up hatred against someone who possesses, or appears to possess, certain characteristics: namely, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, and transgender identity.
Police Scotland has said it will investigate every hate crime complaint it receives, although it said last week that it would no longer send officers to “low-level” offences, including where a theft has taken place where there is no CCTV or witnesses, in a move to free up police hours.
The policing authority has also designated numerous sites as ‘third party reporting centres’ for hate crimes – but has come under fire for including an LGBT+ sex shop called Luke and Jack in Glasgow as one such site.
Scottish Conservative MSP Annie Wells told The Scotsman: “Serious questions must be asked as to who thought a sex shop was an appropriate setting to report a hate crime. The SNP’s act is flawed enough without asking people to relay their experiences in this sort of outlet in the heart of the city centre.
“Glaswegians will rightly be wondering what the thinking behind this decision. Police Scotland should drop this shop from their reporting centres as a matter of urgency.”
However, a Police Scotland spokesman said the force had used third party reporting centres for hate crime for a number of years and that, in some cases, victims and witnesses of a hate crime may not feel comfortable approaching the police directly”.
Feminist groups have pointed out that the protected characteristics do not include sex. “This new law leaves women unprotected from hate crime,” the Scottish National Party MP Joanna Cherry KC told BBC.
She said that the law would “be weaponised by trans rights activists to try to silence, and worse still, criminalise women who do not share their beliefs”.
Author and women’s rights activist, JK Rowling, who lives in Edinburgh, was critical of the bill last week – and was told on X by Rajan Barot, described as a former fraud prosecutor for the CPS, that she should delete previous tweets as they ‘most likely contravene the new law’.
“If you genuinely imagine I’d delete posts calling a man a man, so as not to be prosecuted under this ludicrous law, stand by for the mother of all April Fools’ jokes,” Rowling replied.
‘…the Scottish government has contrived to create a bill which affords greater status and protection to men who cross-dress than it does to actual women.’ ✍️ Alex Massie
https://t.co/NyR2QeZRKs— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) March 17, 2024
If you genuinely imagine I’d delete posts calling a man a man, so as not to be prosecuted under this ludicrous law, stand by for the mother of all April Fools’ jokes. pic.twitter.com/ZVZQ6CV47p
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) March 17, 2024
A legal analysis of the bill published by the Scottish law firm Lindsays said that while “the Scottish government says it is designed to make hate crime law “fit for the 21st century”, Scottish, English and European lawyers “believe the bill provides for an alarming expansion of state power,”.
Francis Hoar, a barrister practising in public law and human rights, said that the bill removes the need for the perpetrator to have shown an intention to “hate” in order to be indicted. “The only exception is if there is a ‘reasonable excuse’ – but no one can know how a court would interpret that”, he said.
“Law should be certain and the citizen should know what conduct is or is not criminal” says Brent Haywood, a partner at Lindsays. “As framed this proposed new law has the potential to be used politically in a climate of increasing virtue signalling”, he noted.
“More alarmingly still, it undermines the distinction between public and private settings, meaning statements made in private conversations could be criminalised,” the analysis found.
Last week, Police Scotland came under fire following the launch of its hate crime awareness campaign which features a red cartoon character warning viewers that giving in to their anger or prejudice could lead them into committing a hate crime.
“The Hate Monster loves it when you get angry. He weighs you down till you end up targeting someone, just because they look or act different to you.”
The campaign claims that young men aged 18-30 “are most likely to commit hate crimes,” who may have “deep-rooted feelings of being socially and economically disadvantaged, combined with ideas about white-male entitlement”.
Scottish Tory justice spokesman Russell Findlay described the Hate Monster as a “pound shop version of a Sesame Street character” that “should never have seen the light of day”.
Loading ...
The whole point of ‘hate speech’ legislation is to make people afraid to speak up and tell the truth. It is a direct attack on freedom of speech which, as we all know, is a cornerstone of democracy.
Exactly.
Call it stifle speech legislation.
Genuine act’s of hatred will be ignored.
Depending on who the perpetrators are.
Utter nightmare for women and right thinking people everywhere. Sex is not protected but perverts are? Coming to Ireland soon if they get their way..
Free speech Ireland petition 18k signatures. But I belueve tgere should be a legal team in place, ready to challenge, if this passes the Seanad
We need to stop calling this “hate” speech legislation and start calling it what it is which is an attack on free speech. We should not be debating on their terms.
Exactly it is free speech suppression.
Someone should send this report onto MacAntee.
Don’t know if it will make sense to her.
But all you can do is try!
Can you imagine… the Scots wanted to be independent! The eejits can’t even stand up for themselves and the freedoms of the children. They’ve allowed the English to sew-up their mouths very easily! Brave heart was a Mel Gibson Hollywood concept… nothing more!
I believe that the use of the term “white male entitlement” is intended to whip up resentment and hatred against people like me. I will report anyone who uses any such words when the Bill becomes law.
Absolute madness, now we are responsible for one’s feelings too?
Delete! opps!