Why the fans who sing songs of hate are committing an offence

[Frankie 8,150]

Professor Tom Devine comments in today's Herald Letters page:

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/comment/herald-letters/why-the-fans-who-sing-songs-of-hate-are-committing-an-offence-1.1093147

 

The controversy over the League Cup Final, and in particular the reported behaviour of some sections of the crowd who were in attendance, has been full of sound and fury but with little emerging in the way of legal clarity about what, if any, offences were committed (ââ?¬Å?Church to send Old Firm film to policeââ?¬Â), The Herald, March 26).

 

A recent experience which I had in a Scottish court may shed some light on the issues involved.

 

I was called to attend a case as an expert witness in a sheriff court in which the accused were charged under Section 74 of the Criminal Justice ( Scotland) Act 2003 with committing a breach of the peace aggravated by religious prejudice. I can only surmise that I was asked to take part in these proceedings because I had advised civil servants during the time of the McConnell government on anti-sectarian policy and also edited an academic study, Scotland�s Shame ? Bigotry and Sectarianism in Modern Scotland, published in 2000.

 

The accused were charged with singing sectarian songs in a public place. They stated they had indeed sung the Fields of Athenry as they were supporters of Glasgow Celtic and that the song was a firm favourite among the Parkhead crowd. However, they denied they had sung any other lyrics, suggested by the Crown, which included such phrases as ââ?¬Å?up the IRAââ?¬Â, ââ?¬Å?the black beretââ?¬Â and ââ?¬Å?Bobby Sandsââ?¬Â .

 

Early in the proceedings the Sheriff ruled that the Fields of Athenry was an Irish folk ballad and in no way could be construed as having sectarian overtones. The court then proceeded to hear submissions on whether references to the IRA, especially those which implied approval of that organisation, could be considered an offence aggravated by religious prejudice under the 2003 legislation.

 

To understand which followed next it is important to be aware of the specifics of the Act. It states that an offence is aggravated by religious prejudice if : (a) ââ?¬Å?the offender evinces towards the victim (if any) of the offence malice and ill-will based on the victimââ?¬â?¢s membership or presumed membership of a religious group, or of a social or cultural group with a perceived religious affiliation; or (b) the offence is motivated (wholly or partly) by malice and ill-will towards members of a religious group, or of a social or cultural group with a perceived religious affiliation, based on their membership of that groupââ?¬Â. The key issue therefore was: Could vocal approval of the IRA in a public place be considered not simply a potential breach of the peace but one aggravated by religious prejudice? The sheriff listened to the evidence, including my own statement, and the various submissions on this question both by defence lawyers and the Crown. He concluded that doubtless some members of the public might take offence at songs being sung in support of an organisation which the UK Government considered to be a terrorist movement. Nonetheless, he ruled that the IRA was a republican military organisation, was not sectarian in intent and that those who showed support for it, real or rhetorical, were not showing ââ?¬Å?malice or ill will towards members of a religious groupââ?¬â?¢Ã¢â?¬â?¢. The charge could not therefore be sustained under the 2003 legislation and the accusation of a religiously aggravated breach was dismissed.

 

To my knowledge little of this case was reported in the press, which is a pity because its results have significant legal implications as to how Scottish law officers and the police respond to fan behaviour at these matches. One conclusion is abundantly clear. Those who sing songs of hate against another religious group are, prima facie, committing an offence under the 2003 Act. I was not present at the League Cup Final nor did I see it on television. But press reports suggest that many thousands of spectators were brazenly and enthusiastically singing such songs in full view of the cameras, the media, a large audience outside Scotland and the police at one of the major occasions in the Scottish sporting calendar.

 

As a democratic and civilised society we should hang our heads in collective shame, not simply as a result of the vile chants which were heard against the religious beliefs of our fellow citizens but because the forces of law and order did nothing to stop it.

 

Prof Tom Devine,

 

Sir William Fraser Professor of Scottish History and Palaeography,

 

University of Edinburgh,

 

Teviot Place, Edinburgh

[Frankie 8,150]

I've taken the liberty of sending the following reply to The Herald for them to publish but I won't hold my breath:

 

Dear Professor Devine,

 

'As a democratic and civilised society we should hang our heads in collective shame' when learned academics such as yourself prevaricate over the glorification of proscribed terrorist organisations which maimed and killed defenceless men, women and children.

 

Of course sectarian chants heard at football grounds are vile and should be punished but what is equally vulgar is when people attempt to portray the issue as one-sided when clearly there is a problem across Scottish football and society as a whole. For example, Section 74 was also used to convict those who wish to use bigoted terms such as h*n'. Yet songs containing said insult are heard every week aimed at those of a 'perceived religious affiliation'.

 

Ergo, the petty attempts by some to lay the blame at the door of one football club are as disingenuous as the efforts made by the authorities to solve this age-old challenge.

 

Frankie

[Bluedell 5,329]

Nonetheless, he ruled that the IRA was a republican military organisation, was not sectarian in intent and that those who showed support for it, real or rhetorical, were not showing ââ?¬Å?malice or ill will towards members of a religious groupââ?¬â?¢Ã¢â?¬â?¢.

 

The IRA targeted people based on their religion and based on their nationality, so how can support for it not show malice towards members of the religious group that they targeted?

[Frankie 8,150]

The IRA targeted people based on their religion and based on their nationality, so how can support for it not show malice towards members of the religious group that they targeted?

 

Indeed - these rulings do seem extremely bizarre but when the courts use clearly partial experts for their knowledge what else do you expect?

 

You have to admire our opponents for their indefatigability.

[Bluedell 5,329]

Yes, I'm sure they would try and claim this is a playful reference to Rangers fans.

 

[26th of foot 5,829]

Tom Devine paints a picture with a most familiar style, namely sectarianism is a one way street. His contribution, both in court and in print on the Herald's correspondence page is another determined effort to legitimise his fellow Sellik supporters continued lionisation of the IRA.

 

Back in the spring of '93, I was coming to the end of my professional life. I travelled by rail on a Saturday morning from Liverpool to Glasgow, my aim to attend the olf firm match at ra Piggery. The date was the 230393, the train was full of Yahoos, a lot of them Irish. It was their home game and they drank and sang their way through the IRA songbook. At Carlisle, the news swept throughout the train that two bombs had been detonated without warning in the town of Warrington.

 

The Yahoos went into a frenzy, some were salivating in anticipation at the carnage and destruction. The last hour of that journey will always stay with me, the intensity of their singing moved through the gears of increased excitement. I alighted from the train at Central and crossed to the Toby Jug. In contrast, the pub was quiet as reports filtered through from Warrington on the TV behind the bar. I met my mates, we shared a taxi to Parkhead, the driver said the radio was reporting the death of a child.

 

We lost that game 2-1, it did NOT matter. The Jungle chorused one song of IRA support after another throughout the game. By seven O'Clock that night, we knew two children had been murdered, 3 year old Jonathan Ball and 12 year old Tim Parry. PIRA's recce of the Warrington shopping centre had spotted an opportunity to maximise damage by placing two bombs in two metal litter bins. In effect, those lattice containers became hundreds of pieces of lacerating shrapnel. Deliberate detonation without warning highlighted their murderous intent.

 

And, Tom Devine wants us to believe that singing songs in support of an organisation capable of the above, is a legitimate act?

[Frankie 8,150]

I suggest you email that fine contribution as well 26th...

[Robert 17]

Devine's piece almost comes across as balanced until his last paragraph, where he makes clear that he sees no need to question, let alone prosecute singing in support of terrorism but simultaneously thinks we 'should hang our heads in collective shame' that religious singing is not prosecuted.

 

His cards are face up, on the table.

[Stimpy 0]

So we're allowed to sing about The UVF/UDA?

 

Seems a precedent has been set and when the cops come calling for singing songs about paramilitary groups we refer them to this case?

[pete 2,499]

So we're allowed to sing about The UVF/UDA?

 

Seems a precedent has been set and when the cops come calling for singing songs about paramilitary groups we refer them to this case?

 

As long as you don't finish with FTP as that is again religious.:smile: