Scot Gov exams contrition was welcome – it’s time for the same on the Hate Crime bill

COMMENT: Jamie Gillies, spokesman for the Free to Disagree campaign

In recent days, newspaper headlines have been dominated by the exam results fiasco. On Tuesday 4 August 75,000 Scottish pupils received lower grades from the SQA than their teachers had predicted, with young people from deprived backgrounds marked down more than their better-off peers. Last week, following a public outcry, the government announced that these results will be revised.

The announcement was welcome news for pupils. Exam results matter. They determine whether a young person can go on to college or university, secure an apprenticeship or go directly into full time employment. For many students, the government’s change of course will affect the trajectory of their lives significantly.

It was also refreshing to see contrition from our political leaders. On Monday, Nicola Sturgeon admitted that too many students had “lost out on grades that they should have had”, saying “I do acknowledge that we did not get this right and I’m sorry for that”.

The First Minister’s decision to hold up her hands and admit fault is commendable. Good leadership includes acknowledging when things don’t go to plan and seeking to set the record straight. The First Minister has committed to doing this in the weeks ahead.

Exam results are not the only thing to have caused major public disquiet in recent weeks. The contentious Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill has accrued numerous detractors including the Scottish Police Federation, the Law Society Scotland, the Faculty of Advocates and the Catholic Church.

Last week, a host of public figures including comedian Rowan Atkinson, writer and independence supporter Val McDermid and philosopher Professor A C Grayling signed a joint letter to The National newspaper expressing concern that the “well meaning” proposals could have “unintended consequences” for artistic expression.

The Free to Disagree campaign, which includes former SNP Deputy Leader Jim Sillars, the National Secular Society, The Christian Institute and Peter Tatchell, has also raised concerns about a potential impact on free speech. Each day the backlash seems to be growing.

Doubtless the intentions behind the Hate Crime bill are good. It’s a terrible thing to be a victim of a crime – not least one motivated by hatred of you. In bringing forward the bill, Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf hardly intends to curb free speech, any more than Nicola Sturgeon intended for Scottish pupils to be handed unfair exam results. However, Mr Yousaf cannot deny the serious problems with his proposals.

Critics warn that draft ‘stirring up of hatred’ offences in Part 2 of the bill are so vaguely worded they could catch legitimate speech and writing by citizens, chilling freedom of expression. They point out that no mens rea – criminal intent – is necessary for an offence to be committed and that an offence can be committed in the privacy of a person’s home. These issues have been highlighted by legal experts. They’re not at all trivial.

A growing number of people are calling for the ‘stirring up’ provisions to be scrapped altogether given the challenges they pose to free speech. Other laws already exist to protect people. There are aggravated offences, with the Hate Crime bill adding another offence relating to age. The Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act criminalises those who intentionally or recklessly cause fear or alarm. It’s unclear what conduct the government intends to catch that isn’t already being caught.

If he won’t withdraw the ‘stirring up’ provisions, Mr Yousaf must accept amendments to them to protect free speech. There are several obvious ways to improve the bill, some of which are alluded to above.

As a spokesman for the Free to Disagree campaign, I would appeal to Mr Yousaf to take a leaf out of the First Minister’s book and try contrition. An announcement from the Justice Secretary that there are problems with the Hate Crime bill would be heartily welcomed. Those of us who have raised concerns are more than willing to engage with the government in the weeks ahead.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *