Irish Parliament passes scaled-back hate crime Bill

The Oireachtas has approved the Irish Government’s controversial hate crime Bill, despite warnings that it still has vague definitions.

Following widespread criticism, Minister for Justice Helen McEntee removed incitement to hatred from the Criminal Justice (Hate Offences) Bill. But the proposals still allow tougher sentences in instances where crimes are deemed to be motivated by hostility towards a protected group.

The Dáil Éireann approved the Seanad’s amendments by 78 to 52 votes, and the proposals are now due to be signed into law. But TDs and senators opposing the Bill said the failure to define hatred is “not acceptable”, and they criticised it for pushing an “ideological” definition of gender into law.

Ideology

The Bill claims that the term ‘gender’ “includes transgender and a gender other than those of male and female”.

Senator Rónán Mullen emphasised that while people should never be attacked because of their gender identity, the wording goes beyond protecting people from assault.

He stated: “It is about mainstreaming an idea that people are not born male or female, but rather as a combination of genders, no gender or somewhere on that new spectrum that is having a negative impact on children who encounter this ideology.”

‘Bad legislation’

Senator Michael McDowell challenged the Justice Minister’s claim that the gender definition would not have any wider ramifications, as it would impact criminal justice statues affected by the proposals.

He said: “I want to know – and I have never had an explanation from anybody – what thing other than transgender is a gender other than those of male and female. What are we actually saying? What are we actually legislating for?”

“I do not see why we in this House should be asked to bring into Irish law the concept that there are unspecified genders, maybe nine in number, which are different from transgender, different from male and different from female but nobody will tell us what they are. That to me is bad legislation.”

Highlighting the expansive nature of the wording, Senator Sharon Keogan took almost 25 minutes to read a list of nearly a thousand ‘genders’ that could be included.

Free speech

Under the previous version of the Bill, there were concerns that the Bill could have impacted the ordinary work of churches.

For example, reading aloud from Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6 or 1 Timothy 1 could have led to accusations that a person was using the Bible to stir up hatred against gay people or atheists.

Or, a strong sermon commending marriage and celibacy and condemning sexual immorality – including same-sex relations – could have been deemed ‘abusive’ by an easily offended visitor.