Hate Crime Scotland: Law Society of Northern Ireland warns Naomi Long after Scotland gives police powers to probe conversations in family homes - move comes after JK Rowling slated new Scottish legislation

He recommended creating new criminal offences for anyone guilty of hate crimes against protected characteristics of race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, age, female gender and those with transgender identity.

Similar controversial legislation came into force this month in Scotland, facing stiff criticism from Harry Potter creator JK Rowling; It removed the traditional "dwelling defence" which protected people from prosecution for expressing private thoughts in their own homes.

Marrinan also recommended that the dwelling defence "should be removed" from new NI legislation, but added that the law should ensure "that truly private conversation can be excluded from the reach of the criminal law".

In a Department of Justice (DOJ) public consultation document In March 2023 Justice Minister Naomi Long agreed that the dwelling defence is "no longer fit for purpose".

She too said that if removed, alternative protections for private conversations would be needed.

Much of Mr Marrinans recommendations and the DOJ consultation focussed on claims that the private dwelling defence is no longer fit for purpose because hatred can now be incited online from private dwellings.

However critics say there is already legislation to deal with online abuse, such as that used in 2015 to prosecute Pastor Jim McConnell for comments about Islam in a sermon posted online.

Asked to explain therefore why it was necessary to remove the private dwelling defence, the minister offered no direct answer.

However, the Law Society for Northern Ireland has now also expressed concern.

A spokesman told the News Letter: “Whilst the Law Society of Northern Ireland is aware that the Minister of Justice plans to introduce a Hate Crime Bill to the Assembly in coming months, the Society has not yet seen any draft legislation.

"Current hate crime legislation is designed to deal with behaviour that is sufficiently severe to reach the threshold for criminal prosecution. Any changes introduced must balance potential offending against the right to freedom of expression and privacy which requires protection in particular circumstances”.

Mrs Long responded by insisting that she planned to retain the private dwelling defence – but also to “modernise” it.

She plans to bring forward legislation in the latter half of this mandate, with Mr Marrinan’s review as “the main framework”.

She added: "The intention of changing the private dwelling defence is not to weaken the protections in law afforded to private conversation which are currently limited to speech in a private dwelling as implied, but to enhance those protections to cover any private communication irrespective of where it takes place or the medium via which it occurs”.

She recognises the need to ensure that changes do not “unduly” interfere with the rights of people to privately discuss matters.

Asked how the PSNI might distinguish between private and non-private conversations in family homes under the new law, the minister offered no direct answer.

FURTHER REACTION

Stephen Evans, Chief Executive Officer of the National Secular Society in London told the News Letter: “The proposed reforms are likely to chill free speech for fear of falling foul of the law. Stormont legislators should heed the lessons from Scotland and tread very carefully.

"We will certainly seek robust safeguards for speech relating to religion to prevent the use of such laws to criminalise or suppress expressions or opinions that some may find subjectively insulting or offensive.

“We see no compelling case for removing the dwelling defence but would welcome additional protections for other private conversations.”

Simon Calvert, Deputy Director of the Christian Institute, gave a similar warning.

“Hate crime legislation of the breadth proposed is a bad idea – just ask the Scottish Government,” he said. “The best approach would be to leave well alone. The Marrinan recommendations were alarming, suggesting a heedless approach to civil liberties. The review said no specific protection for free speech is required in new stirring up hatred offences and recommended the new laws should even apply to what people say in the privacy of their own homes.”

He added: “Journalists, writers and others could also find themselves in hot water if they choose to cover, or express, views that are regarded as politically unacceptable by ‘woke’ activists on social media.”

However Daniel Holder, Deputy Director of the Committee on the Administration of Justice firmly previously strongly defended the removal of the private dwelling defence.

“The ‘dwelling defence’ – essentially that you incited hatred from inside your own home and it was only heard or read by people gathering in your home - is a loophole and anachronism,” he said.

“It makes sense to replace it with a private conversations defence as recommended by the review.”He added that there is already a very strong legal defence for freedom of expression thanks to the Human Rights Act.”