Let us speak in good faith
As criticism of Scottish ministers’ proposed laws to curb hateful speech mounts, religious and secular leaders voice their concern
The Scottish Government’s proposed laws to curb hate crime have come under sustained scrutiny in recent weeks with critics, ranging from football fans and police officers to actors and QCS, suggesting the legislation which attempts to define hateful language is ill-considered, unnecessary and counter-productive.
The Scottish Government says the Bill will offer greater protection to victims of hate, but critics fear it could close down legitimate public debate, limit freedom of expression and discourage the voicing of contentious but honest opinion. It has been suggested, for example, that it could lead to the prosecution of Harry Potter author JK Rowling for expressing her concerns about the impact of trans rights on women.
If passed, the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill will create an offence of “stirring up hatred” against a protected group, expanding existing laws protecting racial groups and Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf has
said it will provide greater protection for victims of and groups affected by hate crime. He has also promised to listen to all opinions about the proposals, for and against. He said: “We are determined to do everything it takes to ensure Scotland is a place where there is zero tolerance of hate crime. This Bill will play an important part in realising this.”
But there is a growing backlash against the legislation, with critics comparing it to laws, later scrapped, aimed at curbing offensive behaviour in football grounds.
Here religious, humanist and secular leaders in Scotland explain their concerns about the proposed legislation.