Scotland implemented new hate crime legislation on Monday, with the law backfiring against one of its strongest advocates, the country’s First Minister, Humza Yousaf.
According to the legislation, an individual commits an offense if they convey material or behave in a manner “that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive,” with the intention of stirring up hatred based on the protected characteristics.
Stirring up hatred based on race, color, nationality, or ethnicity was already illegal in Great Britain under the Public Order Act 1986, but it is now also part of the Hate Crime Act in Scotland, aiming to streamline criminal law.
The threshold for this offense is lower than for other protected characteristics, as it includes “insulting” behavior, and the prosecution only needs to establish that stirring up hatred was “likely” rather than “intended.”
The maximum penalty for this offense is a seven-year prison sentence.
Prior to its launch, high-ranking police officials had anticipated a surge in complaints regarding online content, and judging by the number of social media accounts, many have indeed done so.
However, many of the aforementioned accounts directed their accusations of hate speech at Yousaf himself, in reference to a now notorious speech he gave in the Scottish Parliament on February 20, 2023.
The now-First Minister listed various high-profile positions in the Scottish establishment as being occupied by White people and declared, “that is not good enough.” According to Scotland’s population census of 2023, the nation has a 96% White demographic.
The legislation has come in for criticism from high-profile figures, such as JK Rowling, who described the law as “ludicrous,” and Elon Musk, who stated that it was an “example of why it is so important to preserve freedom of speech.”
Stirring up hatred based on race, color, nationality, or ethnicity was already illegal in Great Britain under the Public Order Act 1986, but it is now also part of the Hate Crime Act in Scotland, aiming to streamline criminal law.
The threshold for this offense is lower than for other protected characteristics, as it includes “insulting” behavior, and the prosecution only needs to establish that stirring up hatred was “likely” rather than “intended.”
The maximum penalty for this offense is a seven-year prison sentence.
Prior to its launch, high-ranking police officials had anticipated a surge in complaints regarding online content, and judging by the number of social media accounts, many have indeed done so.
However, many of the aforementioned accounts directed their accusations of hate speech at Yousaf himself, in reference to a now notorious speech he gave in the Scottish Parliament on February 20, 2023.
The now-First Minister listed various high-profile positions in the Scottish establishment as being occupied by White people and declared, “that is not good enough.” According to Scotland’s population census of 2023, the nation has a 96% White demographic.
Voices of criticismGood morning @HumzaYousaf I have here a video of a man clearly committing a hate crime against white people
— BaldyBarker (@Baldy_Barker) March 31, 2024
I really hope under your new hate crime act that you will get this seen to and action swiftly on it
Many thanks, BaldyBarker x pic.twitter.com/jFTSL31944
The legislation has come in for criticism from high-profile figures, such as JK Rowling, who described the law as “ludicrous,” and Elon Musk, who stated that it was an “example of why it is so important to preserve freedom of speech.”
Nevertheless, the Scottish government asserts that the legislation safeguards against hate and bias without curtailing individual expression.
“There has been a lot of misinformation about the legislation,” Victims and Community Safety Minister Siobhian Brown said, falsely claiming it was “passed unanimously” by MSPs in 2021.
In reality, the law was approved with 82 votes to 32 and four abstentions following heated debates over its provisions.
Supporters of the new law highlight its safeguards intended to preserve freedom of speech.
For instance, it provides a defense for individuals charged with stirring up hatred to demonstrate that their actions were “reasonable.”
It also acknowledges the right to freedom of expression in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which safeguards “ideas that offend, shock, or disturb.”
“There has been a lot of misinformation about the legislation,” Victims and Community Safety Minister Siobhian Brown said, falsely claiming it was “passed unanimously” by MSPs in 2021.
In reality, the law was approved with 82 votes to 32 and four abstentions following heated debates over its provisions.
Supporters of the new law highlight its safeguards intended to preserve freedom of speech.
For instance, it provides a defense for individuals charged with stirring up hatred to demonstrate that their actions were “reasonable.”
It also acknowledges the right to freedom of expression in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which safeguards “ideas that offend, shock, or disturb.”
To be convicted of a hate crime, “you have to be really threatening and really abusive, and there has to be a reasonable assumption from others that that is the case, explained Siobhian Brown.
In addition to the offense of stirring up hatred, the Hate Crime Act consolidates existing laws on crimes aggravated by prejudice.
These offenses involve an offender demonstrating malice or ill-will towards their victim based on a protected characteristic, which can result in a longer sentence or a higher fine.
For example, if an assailant punches someone in the face while making a hateful comment about their age, that could be considered assault aggravated by age-related hatred.
This marks the first time age has been included in the list of protected characteristics for aggravated offenses, a development welcomed by some advocacy groups.v “It’s going to be a positive thing for the country,” remarked Adam Stachura of the charity Age Scotland.
Apprehension over new law
Adam Tomkins, a professor of public law at Glasgow University and a former Conservative MSP, voted against the bill because it could lead to someone being convicted of stirring up hatred for a comment made in private in their own home, not just in public.
Susan Smith of For Women Scotland, which opposed recent proposed changes to gender law, remains skeptical.
“The tests are quite woolly, and we don’t know how people are going to interpret this,” she told BBC News.
“We do anticipate that there will be a lot of malicious complaints, a lot of rather trivial complaints, and potentially people who are investigated will see their lives upended,” she added.
Police efficiency
Chief Superintendent Rob Hay of the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents (ASPS), which represents senior officers, expressed concern about the potential for a “huge uplift” in complaints about social media posts.
Mr. Hay’s primary concern is that Police Scotland “haven’t been provided with any additional resources in terms of dealing with this piece of legislation.”
Just last month, the national force stated it was no longer able to investigate every “low-level” crime, including some cases of theft and criminal damage.
However, it has pledged to investigate every hate crime complaint it receives.
In addition to the offense of stirring up hatred, the Hate Crime Act consolidates existing laws on crimes aggravated by prejudice.
These offenses involve an offender demonstrating malice or ill-will towards their victim based on a protected characteristic, which can result in a longer sentence or a higher fine.
For example, if an assailant punches someone in the face while making a hateful comment about their age, that could be considered assault aggravated by age-related hatred.
This marks the first time age has been included in the list of protected characteristics for aggravated offenses, a development welcomed by some advocacy groups.v “It’s going to be a positive thing for the country,” remarked Adam Stachura of the charity Age Scotland.
Apprehension over new law
Adam Tomkins, a professor of public law at Glasgow University and a former Conservative MSP, voted against the bill because it could lead to someone being convicted of stirring up hatred for a comment made in private in their own home, not just in public.
Susan Smith of For Women Scotland, which opposed recent proposed changes to gender law, remains skeptical.
“The tests are quite woolly, and we don’t know how people are going to interpret this,” she told BBC News.
“We do anticipate that there will be a lot of malicious complaints, a lot of rather trivial complaints, and potentially people who are investigated will see their lives upended,” she added.
Police efficiency
Chief Superintendent Rob Hay of the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents (ASPS), which represents senior officers, expressed concern about the potential for a “huge uplift” in complaints about social media posts.
Mr. Hay’s primary concern is that Police Scotland “haven’t been provided with any additional resources in terms of dealing with this piece of legislation.”
Just last month, the national force stated it was no longer able to investigate every “low-level” crime, including some cases of theft and criminal damage.
However, it has pledged to investigate every hate crime complaint it receives.
Source: BBC
More In Society MORE...
