FRASER SUTHERLAND

Chief executive of Humanist Society Scotland

Currently if someone commits an offence and there is proof they deliberately targeted their victim because of their background – for example, they use racist language during an assault – they can be charged with a “statutory aggravation” hate crime.

This has allowed the courts, rightly in my view, to take seriously crimes perpetrated against protected groups.

The proposed new law would create a “stirring up” offence that doesn’t take into account the intentions of the person who has said, written, or performed something that could potentially stir up hatred. It doesn’t have to be proven that the person meant to stir up hatred – just that it is considered to be “likely to” do so.

A coalition of people from literature, stage and screen joined with academics, human rights campaigners and journalists to voice their concerns about the Hate Crime Bill.

The joint letter, co- ordinated by Humanist Society Scotland, warned that the “unintended consequences” of the new law could be used to criminalise behaviour that should be protected as free speech.

It is accepted in Scots Law that we look for proof about the intention behind someone’s actions, and that we must be satisfied that they meant the outcome they are charged with.

By ignoring this, the new law would leave us in a situation where a person writing a play that includes racist characters could be charged with the same “stirring up” offence as a person who shouts racist abuse at another person. A sensible balance is achievable and I believe the Scottish Parliament will reach it as the Bill is scrutinised.