with West Yorkshire Police have been killed in domestic abuse incidents since 2018.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001y5k7/newsnight-police-unprotection
By stewartb
In the light of the above BBC Newsnight report of failures by two English police forces, to protect women, from ‘Misogyny – A Human Rights Issue’ (8 March 2022), the independent report from the Scottish Government’s Working Group on Misogyny and Criminal Justice led by Dame Helena Kennedy (https://www.gov.scot/publications/misogyny-human-rights-issue/ )
Helena Kennedy writes: “Scotland has proudly led the way in many areas concerning women’s rights and violence against women; the zero tolerance campaign on domestic abuse, for example, was initiated here. Scotland was at the fore and set the gold standard in recognising that coercive, emotional and financial control was a form of domestic abuse. The reforms recommended in this report are also innovative, change-making and radical.”
She adds: “It is admirable and right that Scotland holds the ambition of ridding itself of misogyny altogether. It is an ambition for serious social change. It will be no mean feat but making a strong start by creating new laws, specifically created for women, will be a clear declaration of intent. These recommendations are intended to reach deeper into the foundations of inequality. They are purposely framed to create a profound shake-up. There will undoubtedly be opposition from those who are wedded to the old order. But men and women who want a better society for themselves and for future generations will embrace the spirit if not the letter of this Report. Change has to come and society is ready for it.”
As a postscript Kennedy notes: “I was given free rein to choose my own Independent Working Group ..”
În her introduction to the report, Kennedy remarks in a section entitled ‘Laws Worth Fighting For’:
“The invitation (i.e. from the Scottish Government) to consider misogyny and the law might be considered by many as a hospital pass. Why would anyone step into this hostile territory? I have spent my life arguing for legal reform to create systems where people can be treated without discrimination and with equality and justice. Hatred always stems from seeing certain ‘others’ as ‘lesser’ beings.
“Since the 1970s I have fought for women’s rights but I have also fought against class bias and racism and religious bigotry and homophobia. I have been a strong advocate for justice for trans people, having acted in a number of cases involving the most egregious persecution of those who have changed their gender identity.
” I was leading counsel in the first trans case in an international court – the European Court of Justice; we won my client’s case of sex discrimination when she asserted her right to live as a woman. I have acted for a young trans woman who was raped, then ridiculed by police, and when she withdrew her complaint, knowing she would be humiliated in the witness box, she was prosecuted for perverting the course of justice and wasting police time. Trans people suffer unimaginable abuse and discrimination and that should not be minimised. Trans women face misogyny as well as prejudice about their change of gender.
“Disabled women, young and elderly women, LGBTI+ women and women of colour all face prejudice alongside misogyny. The law should seek to protect as many people as possible. I should also probably add that most of my clients over the years have actually been men and I have sought justice with vigour for them too.”
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
A fair amount of the fuss about the “Stirring Up Hate Act” which has become operational is about the fact that the Act does not deal with stirring up hatred against women.
People like JK Rowling and Jean Freeman (who should know better) makes an issue of this, ignoring the fact that, while hatred against women was one of the categories in the original Bill, the Scottish Parliament decided to remove it and to develop a separate and specific bill based on Helena Kennedy’s recommendations.
In yesterday’s Guardian the fact that hatred against women was not included was stated without being balanced by the information I have provided above.
Alasdair Macdonald.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Scottish Parliament decided to remove it and to develop a separate and specific bill based on Helena Kennedy’s recommendations”
Indeed….
NMRN
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think Joanne Freeman was calling out the media for leading the misinformation charge against the new law. Media as per usual choose to ignore that part.
DottieB
LikeLiked by 1 person
I see today the politics section of the BBC News website is still giving the pre-eminent place to the article headlined: ‘Ministers ‘caught by surprise’ over hate crime row – Freeman’. It’s based on a BBC interview which I didn’t hear. Given the profile accorded the article by BBC Scotland, there are some things worth noting about it.
Within the article we read this about Ms Freeman: ‘She also said misogyny should have been included in the legislation, which creates a crime of “stirring up hatred” relating to protected characteristics.’ And later: ‘Ms Freeman said she understood why some women’s groups agreed misogyny should not be included FOLLOWING A 2022 REPORT by a review group chaired by Baroness Helena Kennedy KC.’ (My emphasis)
This is an incomplete and misleading account. In May 2018, Scottish Women’s Aid, Engender and Rape Crisis Scotland issued the following joint statement immediately following the publication of Lord Bracadale’s report on legal reforms to address hate crime in Scotland.
Source: https://womensaid.scot/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Response-to-Hate-Crime-Statement-SWA-Engender-RCS.pdf
For background see also: See Bracadale (May 2018) Independent Review of Hate Crime Legislation in Scotland – Final Report. Scottish Government.
The statement includes the following (with my emphasis): ‘Women’s organisations disappointed by Lord Bracadale’s recommendations, seek further dialogue with Scottish Government:
‘Engender, Rape Crisis Scotland, and Scottish Women’s Aid are disappointed by the recommendations in the inquiry’s report. The question of how to tackle misogynistic online abuse, sexual harassment in public spaces, and incitement to misogyny is one being raised worldwide. Women and girls face epidemic levels of misogynistic hate in schools, in the workplace, on city streets, and online. WE CALLED FOR A STANDALONE MISOGYNISTIC HATE CRIME TO BE CREATED IN SCOTLAND AS a way of disrupting this epidemic.
‘We think the recommendations put forward in this (i.e. Bracadale’s) report do not pay enough attention to international experience and evidence. Other nations and states have found that SIMPLY ADDING GENDER TO A LAUNDRY-LIST OF GROUPS PROTECTED BY HATE CRIME LEGISLATION LEADS TO UNDERREPORTING, UNDER-INVESTIGATION, AND UNDER-PROSECUTION. We don’t want a law that languishes unused, giving impunity to perpetrators.’
And: ‘Sandy Brindley, chief executive of Rape Crisis Scotland, said: “Women and girls are facing epidemic levels of misogynistic abuse, online, in the streets, on public transport and in our schools. We think there is A NEED FOR A BOLDER APPROACH TO CONSIDERING HOW THE LAW CAN BETTER PROTECT WOMEN’S RIGHTS.”
Recall, this statement pre-dates Baroness Kennedy’s working group and its own report which indeed came out in support of separate legislation. It is likely that the response of these women’s rights groups in 2018 to Bracadale’s recommendations were instrumental in the Scottish Government commissioning Baroness Kennedy’s investigation into how best to tackle misogyny.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Apologies for length! It’s almost as if the editorial policy at BBC Scotland over the new hate crime legislation is to be as uninformative as possible, including about what happens in England and Wales. We know that context and perspective is not a characteristic of BBC news and current affairs journalism in Scotland. So there are many information voids that need filled!
One useful source to share is Statutory Guidance issued recently by the Home Office. It follows a Court of Appeal case in England in 2022 which ruled AGAINST the College of Policing over guidance it had previously issued to police forces in England and Wales on the recording of Non-Crime Hate Incidents’ (NCHIs).
See: The Court of Appeal (Civil Division) – Case No: C1/2020/1382 – On appeal from the High Court of Justice – Between The Queen on the application of Harry Miller – Appellant – and – The College of Policing – Respondent (20 December 2021).
This is the relevant Home Office document: The Home Office (3 June, 2023) Statutory guidance: Non-Crime Hate Incidents: Code of Practice on the Recording and Retention of Personal Data. (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/non-crime-hate-incidents-code-of-practice/non-crime-hate-incidents-code-of-practice-on-the-recording-and-retention-of-personal-data-accessible )
It provides this background (with my emphasis): ‘Non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs) are recorded by the police to collect information on ‘hate incidents’ that COULD ESCALATE into more serious harm or indicate heightened community tensions, but which do not constitute a criminal offence.’
‘NCHI recording stems from the murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. The 1999 STEPHEN LAWRENCE INQUIRY REPORT CALLED FOR CODES OF PRACTICE TO CREATE “A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM OF REPORTING AND RECORDING OF ALL RACIST INCIDENTS AND CRIMES”.
‘NCHI recording has SINCE EXPANDED TO COVER ALL THE PROTECTED CHARACTERISTICS COVERED BY HATE CRIME LAWS IN ENGLAND AND WALES: race, religion, disability, sexual orientation and transgender identity’. (Note not ‘women’)
‘THIS DATA IS VITAL FOR HELPING THE POLICE TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THEY MUST TARGET RESOURCES TO PREVENT SERIOUS CRIMES WHICH MAY LATER OCCUR.’
The Home Office document provides definitions:
‘A non-crime hate incident (NCHI) means an incident or alleged incident which involves or is alleged to involve an act by a person (‘the subject’) which is PERCEIVED BY A PERSON OTHER THAN THE SUBJECT TO BE MOTIVATED – WHOLLY OR PARTLY – BY HOSTILITY OR PREJUDICE TOWARDS PERSONS WITH A PARTICULAR CHARACTERISTIC.’
‘An “incident” is defined in the National Standard for Incident Recording (NSIR) as “a single distinct event or occurrence which disturbs an individual, group or community’s quality of life or causes them concern”. The NSIR covers all crime and non-crime incidents.’
The Statutory Guidance also has this: ’.. THERE MAY BE INSTANCES WHERE A FORCE DEEMS IT NECESSARY TO RECORD AN INCIDENT INVOLVING A DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTIC THAT IS NOT COVERED BY HATE CRIME LEGISLATION. Although outside the scope of this code, in this instance, the recording authority should apply the same considerations as set out in this code, particularly in the context of the need to protect the right to freedom of expression and in relation to whether the personal data of the subject of the report should be recorded.
Further, regarding Home Office definitions: ‘ “Hostility” and “prejudice” have NO SPECIFIC LEGAL DEFINITION. Hostility represents the legal threshold for prosecuting hate crimes in law, whereas prejudice only features in NCHI recording. For the purposes of NCHI recording, either factor may be present, in line with the ORDINARILY UNDERSTOOD SENSE of these terms. The Crown Prosecution Service state that, for hostility, “WE USE THE EVERYDAY UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORD which includes ill-will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment and dislike.” The recording authority should give due regard to the CPS’s definition when considering whether hostility or prejudice has been exhibited.’
And the following are extracts from a ‘Joint statement on Hate Crime from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC)’ dated October 2023:
‘‘Hate crime legislation was agreed by Parliament against a background of rising discrimination and prejudice. The law reflects parliamentary intent to support victims of hate crime – ordinary people who experience criminal behaviour involving hostility and hatred based on who they are. The law covers hostility on the grounds of disability, race, religion, sexual orientation and being transgender.’
Then: ‘THE POLICE AND THE CPS TREAT HATE CRIME AS A PRIORITY CRIME. Following the Report of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, we agreed a common definition of hate crime:
“Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on a person’s disability or perceived disability; race or perceived race; or religion or perceived religion; or sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation or a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender.”
‘We are proactive in the investigation and prosecution of hate crime. The police will investigate the evidence of such hostility where a crime has been reported, or the police believe the offence may have involved hostility towards one or more of the grounds described in law. Where there is sufficient evidence of such hostility, it is more likely that a prosecution will be in the public interest. A successful prosecution will also attract an enhanced or increased sentence from the court. Victims are also entitled to enhanced rights under the Victims’ Code.’
‘THERE IS NO ‘HIERARCHY’ OF HATE CRIME. WE FUNDAMENTALLY BELIEVE THAT EVERYONE SHARES A RIGHT TO LIVE FREE FROM HATE CRIME, REGARDLESS OF THE INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS TARGETED.’
Notwithstanding ALL the above on tackling hate crimes and non-hate crime incidents in England and Wales – including the definition of terms, including a court ruling against how the police recorded a Non-Crime Hate Incident plus the necessity for the Home Office to publish very lengthy new statutory guidance – ONLY in Scotland does the public service broadcaster amplify the view of a single legislator stating that broadly equivalent legislation passed with cross-party support in the Scottish Parliament is ‘UNWORKABLE’.
The BBC News website tells us: ‘.. writing in the Sunday Mail newspaper, FORMER FIRST MINISTER LORD MCCONNELL BRANDED IT “UNWORKABLE”. And goes on: ‘Lord McConnell warned Police Scotland officers would be dealing with many “simply spurious” complaints at a time when the force’s budget was under pressure. He added: “The arguments between feminist and transgender campaigners – EXCLUDING CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN FROM THE ACT HAS inflamed the situation with many women feeling their concerns are ignored.’ (On this so-called ‘exculsion’ see my earlier btl post.)
BBC Scotland fails(again) to follow a public service role by providing any evidence to support or refute these assertions by this (supposedly) noble lord, not even to provide some context and/or perspective within which its readers might wish to assess McConnell’s remarks on this important public issue.
LikeLiked by 1 person
People who persist in making spurious complaints driven ( I suspect by their political leanings and racial prejudices) should be charged and fined for wasting police time.
LikeLiked by 1 person