header-logo header-logo

Commission recommends hate crime reforms

08 December 2021
Issue: 7960 / Categories: Legal News , Equality , Criminal
printer mail-detail

LGBT+ and disabled victims would be given the same protection as those targeted because of their race and religion, under a shake-up of hate crime legislation recommended by the Law Commission

In 2020/21, there were 10,679 prosecutions and 9,263 convictions for hate crimes in England and Wales. However, crimes involving racial or religious hostility can be treated as ‘aggravated offences’ and receive higher maximum sentences than the base offence, whereas crimes involving hostility on the basis of the victim’s sexual orientation, trans identity or disability qualify for ‘enhanced sentencing’ which increases the sentence, but only within the existing maximum. The commission proposes that the five characteristics be protected equally.

The proposals, announced this week, would also increase protection for women and girls by extending the offence of stirring up hatred (behaviour that incites others to hate entire groups) to cover sex or gender. This is aimed at tackling ‘incel’ (involuntarily celibate) ideology, following an increase in rape and murder threats against women from incels.

The commission recommends the government consider a new offence of public sexual harassment, which it believes would provide more effective protection than adding sex or gender to hate crime laws.

It also proposes tightening up freedom of expression laws, and would safeguard private conversations regardless of where they take place and ‘neutral reporting’ by

journalists of inflammatory hate speech. It proposes providing explicit protection for certain controversial topics―‘gender critical’ views, criticism of foreign governments and discussion of cultural practices and immigration, asylum and citizenship policy.

While hate speech and ‘stirring up’ offences (for example, racist chanting at football matches) receive a lot of public attention, the Commission highlights that the threshold for prosecution is high, and there are fewer than ten prosecutions in a typical year. There is currently no ‘stirring up’ offence for hate speech on the basis of disability or trans identity.

Law Commissioner, Prof Penney Lewis said: ‘Hate crime has a terrible impact on victims and it’s unacceptable that the current levels of protection are so inconsistent.

‘Our recommendations would improve protections for victims while also ensuring that the right of freedom of expression is safeguarded.’

Issue: 7960 / Categories: Legal News , Equality , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll