Hate crime Bill – subjective interpretation

An authoritarian approach

Sir, – In relation to the new “hate speech” Bill currently being debated in the Seanad, it seems incredible that the definition of “hatred” has not been addressed in any real way. The Bill is so open to subjective interpretation, and it is difficult to understand how there can be an objective approach and a lack of bias on the part of those whose job it is to uphold the law. What constitutes “hate” is wide open to interpretation.

If this Bill is passed, I am concerned about the ability of Irish people to exercise free speech. I am concerned that the space for open and robust debate will be lost in our culture. I am concerned that there will be widespread fear among individuals who wish to express an opinion that in any way goes “against the grain” of popular thought.

This Bill purports to protect the most vulnerable in our society and yet we have refugees sleeping on the streets of our capital city.

I have worked with vulnerable and marginalised groups for many years, and I believe that they need real action, practical support and better resources to protect them and help them live a quality life. Instead, our Government sees fit to pour its energy into a Bill that seems to me to be no more than virtue signalling!

READ MORE

This Bill feels like a backward step in our supposedly “progressive” society. Minister for Justice Helen McEntee claims widespread support for the Bill but has yet to provide the evidence to back this statement up.

This Bill feels dangerously close to an authoritarian approach by our Government. Why is it not being discussed more widely on mainstream media when it will have such huge ramifications for civil society?

It is hard to believe that this is the direction our country is taking. – Yours, etc,

STEPHANIE METCALFE,

Ashford,

Co Wicklow.

Sir, – Perhaps I was just being naive, but for most of my adult life I was under the impression that new legislation in our country came about as a response to perceived shortcomings in existing legislation, and only after careful scrutiny by Oireachtas committees set up for that very purpose.

In recent years, I have changed my mind. It now seems to me that what we have often been getting instead is new legislation whose main purpose is to win brownie points for politicians from our liberal media and NGOs.

Instead of scrutinising legislation and researching relevant data, most members of Oireachtas committees seem increasingly to view these occasions as opportunities to parade their own liberal credentials.

The hate speech Bill is only the latest example of the sort of really bad laws that can result from this lack of proper scrutiny.

I am glad to see that even the liberal readership of the Irish Times is concerned about it (Letters, June 17th), although the legislation will likely still go through unless RTÉ and the mainstream newspapers take a turn against it.

Those are the political realities: laws are getting passed, and policies implemented, which have the approval of the media, with much of the electorate concerned about the consequences, but cowed into silence for fear of media backlash. Public concerns about immigration, and about changes to the school curriculum, are cases in point.

As for legislation, the hate speech legislation should be seen alongside the proposed legislation to ban prayer vigils outside abortion centres, and the amendment to the abortion legislation which recently passed second stage in the Dáil. Proposed legislation with really sinister consequences if enacted, badly researched or not researched at all, designed to appeal only to those who shape the news and political discussion, and who want to cancel their opponents. – Yours, etc,

JIM STACK,

Lismore,

Co Waterford.