John Finnie writes about the introduction of a new law in Scotland which aims to drive the ugliness of sectarianism from football north of the border.
Following a weekend which saw football fans in Glasgow protest over the Scottish government’s plans to tackle sectarianism, MSPs will today get the opportunity to debate the measures contained within the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications bill; ahead of the debate, John Finnie MSP (SNP, Highlands and Islands), a member of the parliament’s justice committee and a former police officer for 20 years, outlines the case for the legislation
Football is Scotland’s national sport and, sadly, the beautiful game in season 2010-11 will not be remembered for its great matches. Rather, many will recall, with shame, the threatening mail, the parcel bombs, the hateful online messages and a football manager attacked at a game screened around the world.
The offensive behaviour at football and threatening communications (Scotland) bill is not intended to be the single answer to the sectarianism which blights our society. It is intended to do what it exactly what it says in the title: Deal with offensive behaviour at football matches and threatening communications.
Following last season’s shocking events there was an understandable public demand for the government to act to avoid any repetition. The government acted swiftly, indeed too swiftly for some. So, when we listened to those wishing more time to consider our proposals, and extended the legislative timetable, the Scottish parliament responded positively approving the general principals of the bill by 103 votes to five.
It is unfortunate that the initial consensus, entirely in line with a poll which showed 91 per cent of people in Scotland back stronger action on sectarianism, withered as the bill progressed.
The bill creates two new criminal offences.
The first criminalises threatening or offensive behaviour likely to incite public disorder at a regulated football match, including offensive singing or chanting.
The second offence is concerned with the communications of threats intended to incite religious hatred or threats of serious violence (other than through unrecorded speech) wherever these are made. It also covers implied threats (e.g. bullets or images depicting serious harm) and postings on websites like Twitter and Facebook.
The legislation was scrutinised in great detail by the parliament’s justice committee.
Scotland’s senior legal officer, the lord advocate, twice gave oral evidence, on each occasion laying out the deficiencies of the existing legislation. The lord advocate was supported by those who police our matches, the Scottish Police Federation, the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents and the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland; front-line officers, match-commanders and strategic leaders respectively.
The committee also heard from the British Transport Police who police fans using our rail network to attend matches, and they too warmly welcomed the additional powers.
The majority of the committee supported the new offence of offensive behaviour at football believing that ‘the government has made the case that there are gaps in the law that do not enable the police and prosecutors to target offensive behaviour effectively.’
Many lay-people wrongly believe the common law crime of ‘breach of the peace’, a long time catch-all charge for a range of behaviours, is sufficient to address the conduct that must be tackled. However in his evidence the lord advocate referred to examples of racist behaviour that had not been classed by the courts as a breach of the peace.
In relation to songs being sung, the lord advocate has issued guidelines which emphasise that it is matter for the judgement of a police officer and points to types of songs and lyrics that are likely to be threatening or express hatred, for example those which ‘promote or celebrate violence against another person’s religion, culture or heritage’. Importantly, as well as being threatening or offensive ‘it must be proved that the conduct was likely to incite public disorder.’
Important too to note that elsewhere in the UK, and in the Irish Republic, there are specific offences criminalising threats made with the intent of inciting religious hatred so legislation is required to change this for Scotland.
The ‘threatening communications’ aspect of the bill drew wider consensus with an acknowledgement of a need to have in place specific legislation to address increasing internet use and the growth of social media.
The Scottish government will legislate after listening and responding to a wide range of views. The legislation will contain a ‘review clause’.
It will allow for the extension of the offence to cover additional characteristics including age and gender at a later date, which will enable the issues to be examined following further consultation and a full examination of evidence. The government have no wish to infringe legitimate freedom of expression and have no objection to the inclusion of such a clause in the legislation.
The SNP government have understood right from the start that the vast majority of football fans in Scotland deplore sectarianism. With the regard to the troublesome minority already there is some welcome evidence of supporters modifying their behaviour and this is most welcome.
In conclusion, the need for the legislation has been explained by legal experts, the police and prosecution authorities.
Existing breach of the peace legislation alone is not sufficient and it is important that law enforcement agencies have the necessary tools they are requesting to take action. Existing laws will remain available but this will allow for a more effective response to the issue.
The bill will only criminalise behaviour likely to lead to public disorder which expresses or incites hatred, is threatening or is otherwise offensive to a reasonable person so, here’s hoping for many trouble-free football seasons ahead across our nation, remembered by great games not blighted by off-field activities which expose a diminishing ugly element within society that has no place in a modern Scotland.
• Has racism returned to football? – Shamik Das, October 25th 2011
• No last orders for Sky as sporting stranglehold remains – Will Durnan, October 15th 2011
• Spanish and Italian strikes show the growth in sporting socialism – Rich Hook, August 27th 2011
• All eyes on Barcelona as racism rears its ugly head again – Shamik Das, May 3rd 2011
• Let’s hope the World Cup really was the beginning of a better future for South Africa – Mark Beacon, July 18th 2010
As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.
We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.
6 Responses to “Sectarian Law will address “ugly element” within Scottish society”
Sectarian Law will address “ugly element” within Scottish society: John Finnie writes about the introduction of … http://t.co/fe3ukhCZ
Sectarian Law will address “ugly element” within Scottish society – Left Foot Forward http://t.co/v05TrhyT
Sectarian Law will address “ugly element” within Scottish society, writes @JohnFinnieSNP: http://t.co/U65D47bA
RT @leftfootfwd: Sectarian Law will address “ugly element” within Scottish society http://t.co/aMH263DT
There are several reasons why this bill isn’t up to scratch:
1) It doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of ‘Scotland’s shame’. This bill, either out of deliberately or out of ignorance, limits its scope to football. So are we to take from this that sectarianism/racism is only a problem with relation to football? It creates a bizarre situation where if you sing something/have a banner saying something at a football match you will be arrested, but that if you expressed the same opinions the next day while marching through a city centre with your local branch of the Orange Order that would be fine? This Bill is just one in a long line of attempts to ‘fix’ Scotland’s sectarian problem without looking at how it came about or its causes. The old hackneyed ‘both sides are as bad as the other’ or ‘it’s all around football, they are only 90 minute bigots’ has been thrown out, as we saw with the sending of viable explosive devices and/or bullets to Trish Goodman MSP and Keith Patrick Cardinal O’Brien, neither of whom played for Celtic, the only characteristic they share is an ethno-religious background. This Bill fails to tackle Scotland’s real sectarian problem.
2)This is a bill to combat sectarianism that doesn’t actually define what sectarianism is. In s1(2) it gives a definition that would be perfectly acceptable for an offence of religious breach of the peace but ignores the details necessary for the types of situation it is aimed at. As Prof. Devine asked, would a Celtic fan singing a traditional Irish song of rebellion against the British Crown (i.e. ‘the Fields of Athenry’, or even the Soldiers Song which had only previously been given the OK due to the intervention of the Irish ambassador) lead to arrest?
3) It’s not specific enough, it covers regulated football matches, the definition of which is given in s2(4)(a) as including a person travelling to a football match, including breaks, whether they actually intended attending a football match or not. So does this bill cover everyone travelling anywhere for any purpose? Someone had better warn Ian Paisley not to visit Scotland!
4) There are already existing offences through which the police can deal with this type of behaviour – the problem is that they don’t use them.
In short like the much touted ‘sectarianism summit’ this bill makes for good headlines but bad law.