Fans can still influence the Football Bill - RST

[ian1964 10,486]

Monday, 21 November 2011 11:21

 

At a meeting between senior civil servants, police, government department officials and representatives of various supporters trusts it was made clear fans can still change the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications ( Scotland) Bill.

 

Time is running out but the RST urges itâ??s members and supporters to make the effort to contact your MSP (particularly SNP ones) and lobby them to oppose the Bill.

 

You can find your local MSP here - http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/msps.aspx

 

Action and debate by fans has already seen all the opposition parties in the Scottish Parliament come out to vote against the Bill due to itâ??s potentially harmful effects on civil liberties.

 

This coming Tuesday the Justice Committee of the parliament will undertake a line-by-line analysis of the Bill and a discussion on the amendments. If you email the members there is still a chance they can include amendments to particular clauses. You can find the members of the Justice Committee here - http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/29845.aspx. This session will be streamed live on the web.

 

The proposed Stage 3 session of the full Parliament is expected to be in December where there will be a substantive vote and the Bill can pass into law and possibly be active by February next year.

 

At the meeting with supporters trust it was clear that the opposition to the Bill has had some effect with the government, for example, offering some concessions to religious groups with amendments to make clear there would be no interference with freedom of expression, robust criticism and the ability to proselytise for converts.

 

However, all the trusts represented remained opposed to the Bill in itâ??s entirety as we regard it as injurious to the civil right of football fans and given the now highly politicised atmosphere around football matches almost any boisterous behaviour inside a football ground will be liable to prosecution on the basis of not just sectarianism but of offensiveness.

 

Allied to that the Bill seeks to lower the level of proof needed with regard to Breach Of The Peace style offenses from a potential of actual public disorder to one merely of the potential to cause â??fear and alarm.â?

 

http://www.rangerssupporterstrust.co.uk/rstsite/latest-rst-news/406-fans-can-still-influence-the-football-bill

[aweebluesoandso 290]

I'm in a quandary now, lately we have seen the scum being rightly smashed for their IRA sectarian songs. Do i want to jeopardize the good work the police are doing to remove this vile behavior from football? I'm now thinking let the bill go through and we might yet see the end of Irish Republican terrorist support in our country.

[Stimpy 0]

I'm in a quandary now, lately we have seen the scum being rightly smashed for their IRA sectarian songs. Do i want to jeopardize the good work the police are doing to remove this vile behavior from football? I'm now thinking let the bill go through and we might yet see the end of Irish Republican terrorist support in our country.

The police are smashing them without the bill though, hence we don't actually need it as the laws are already there. No?

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Allied to that the Bill seeks to lower the level of proof needed with regard to Breach Of The Peace style offenses from a potential of actual public disorder to one merely of the potential to cause â??fear and alarm.â?

 

http://www.rangerssupporterstrust.co.uk/rstsite/latest-rst-news/406-fans-can-still-influence-the-football-bill

 

Whoever wrote this statement is somewhat confused.

 

The leading case governing the offence of breach of the peace is Smith v Donnelly 2001 SCCR 800. It was held in that case that â??what is required to constitute the crime is conduct severe enough to cause alarm to ordinary people and threaten serious disturbance to the community.â? In other words a breach of the peace occurs if an ordinary person is placed in a state of fear and alarm. In order to prove a Breach of the Peace it is necessary to prove that someone was alarmed, annoyed or disturbed by the incident.

 

Under the OBB as proposed it will be necessary to prove:

 

offensive behaviour;

the behaviour occurs in relation to a regulated football match;

the behaviour is or would be likely to incite poublic disorder.

 

So I think it is clear that the offence of OFFENSIVE BEHAVIOUR AT FOOTBALL will be much more difficult to prove than Breach of the Peace which can occur in a wide variety of circumstances.