Ohio Senator JD Vance has written to the Irish ambassador to the US warning that proposed hate speech legislation would “chill important public debate” in particular with respect to the most controversial and publicly significant matters.”
The Daily Signal reports that the Republican Senator sent a letter to Ambassador Geraldine Byrne Nason expressing strong concerns about the controversial Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill 2022, which was supported by both government and most of the Opposition in the Dáil, but has now attracted widespread criticism.
“I write to express concern about legislation pending in the Oireachtas [aka the Irish parliament] that could undermine Ireland’s commitment to universally prized freedoms, including the freedom of speech,” Vance wrote.
“Given that President [Éamon] de Valera himself was imprisoned for sedition in 1918, I urge your government to consider the impact of this legislation on Ireland’s proud tradition of free speech.”
He argued that the proposed legislation is “full of vague prohibitions that would chill important public debate if they were to become law, particularly with respect to the most controversial and publicly significant matters.”
The text of the bill “notes that a person can be imprisoned if they “prepare or possess” material that is “likely to incite violence or hatred against a person or a group of persons on account of their protected characteristics or any of those characteristics with a view to the material being communicated to the public or a section of the public, whether by himself or herself or another person.”
The proposal lists the “protected characteristics” as including, race, color, nationality, religion, national or ethnic origin, descent, gender, sex characteristics, sexual orientation, or disability.
It also criminalises behaviour which is likely to incite … hatred against a person or a group of persons on account of their protected characteristics [while] being reckless as to whether … hatred is thereby incited,” Vance pointed out.
“What on earth does that mean?” questioned the Ohio Senator. “Would the prohibition include ‘recklessly’ attributing social ills, like crime, to increased immigration to Ireland?”
“Would it include ‘recklessly’ affirming that gender is biologically determined and that there are only two genders, male and female?” he asked.
“Even if a court would not interpret the law to prohibit that sort of activity, Irish citizens could be forgiven for thinking that it does,” he said. “And if those citizens self-censor to protect themselves from prosecution, Ireland will be robbed of the meaningful public discourse that all democracies need.”
Vance wrote that the United States “routinely condemns” censorship in countries like China, Iran, or Myanmar, and noted that the State Department had recently imposed visa restrictions on Iranian government officials who may have been involved in quelling free speech rights of peaceful protesters.
“I am alarmed that one of our closest friends, a democracy dedicated to upholding cherished freedoms, should undertake such legislation,” the senator wrote.
He called on the Irish ambassador to explain whether the legislation would be consistent with Ireland’s treaty obligations – and asked whether the bill would be applicable to U.S. government officials visiting Ireland and to other classes of foreign visitors.
“If the bill becomes law, what steps will you take to ensure that Ireland’s departure from fundamental values like the freedom of expression does not damage its relationship with the United States?” he added.
Vance had previously retweeted remarks from Green Party Senator, Pauline O’Reilly where she said: “We are restricting freedom but we’re doing it for the common good.”
“Yes, you have rights, but they are restricted for the common good,” she said.
“Ireland senator wants to criminalize speech that causes too much “discomfort” for people. If this were happening in Russia or China or many other nations we would call it totalitarian and threaten economic sanctions,” Vance wrote.
Ireland senator wants to criminalize speech that causes too much “discomfort” for people. If this were happening in Russia or China or many other nations we would call it totalitarian and threaten economic sanctions. https://t.co/BgzB5aApXC
— J.D. Vance (@JDVance1) November 27, 2023
The hate speech bill has been described as draconian by a wide-range of commentators, and Senator Michael McDowell, a former Attorney General and Minister for Justice has demanded that the government define what “hate” means in the legislation.
Former Justice Minister, @SenatorMcDowell, demands a definition for 'hate' in the Hate Speech Bill.@HMcEntee previously admitted that she has not included a definition of 'hate' in order to ensure easier convictions. This is retrograde lawmaking to say the least. pic.twitter.com/LLNb52Hbaq
— Free Speech Ireland (@FreeSpeechIre) November 30, 2023
"This is out of the dark ages. This is not something that we would expect from a modern, progressive country like Ireland”: Journalist Michael Shellenberger says Ireland's Hate Speech legislation is the "most draconian initiative anywhere in the world right now."#gript pic.twitter.com/H48q9oLlfB
— gript (@griptmedia) October 2, 2023
Last week, Tánaiste and Foreign Affairs Minister Michéal Martin accused Gript reporter Ben Scallan of being “obsessed with hate speech”.
"You're obsessed with hate speech": Irish Foreign Affairs Minister Micheál Martin bats away a question by @Ben_Scallan about whether calling for the destruction of Israel would count as "hate speech" under his bill.
He added: "I'm not interested in the legislation."#gript pic.twitter.com/lMYlzUEgvW
— gript (@griptmedia) December 4, 2023
The bill has drawn international attention, with Elon Musk describing the proposed legislation as a “massive attack against freedom of speech” – and later adding that “the people of Ireland should not stand for this!”.
Massive attack on freedom of speech
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 29, 2023
Fatima Gunning writing on this platform said that the bill allowed for “an entirely subjective” report of “feeling hatred” from another person “to be sufficient for an offence to be reported and the onus is on the accused to prove their innocence”.
She also pointed to one of the most controversial sections of the bill, arguing that “you could go to jail for refusing to provide your passwords”.
You could find yourself in the clink if you refuse to provide the Gardaí with passwords to your personal information such as on your computer if accused of a hate crime for reasons not limited to those set out above.
The bill states that it is an offence to refuse to provide police with “any password necessary to operate it and any encryption key or code necessary to unencrypt the information accessible by the computer.”
As reported by Gript’s Gary Kavanagh, a computer is defined, in the legislation, as “a personal organiser or any other electronic means of information storage and retrieval.”
Those who refuse to hand over this information will be guilty of an offence and will be liable for a fine of €5,000 and imprisonment for up to 12 months.
In May, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar defended the government’s decision to press ahead with hate-speech laws, despite 73% of responses to a public consultation raising concerns about free speech or opposing the measure.
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar defends disregarding the results of the public consultation on "hate speech" laws, arguing that "very often" such consultations are hijacked by "campaigning groups" and are not "reflective of public opinion."#gript pic.twitter.com/X6EC0uF6NO
— gript (@griptmedia) May 4, 2023