Dr. Seamus Taylor:

I thank the Chair and committee for giving me this opportunity. I welcome the Government's commitment to address hate crime as set out in this general scheme. The principle underpinning the proposed Bill and much of the substance are welcome. I have some specific concerns. My concerns are based upon 25 years of practical experience in the equality and diversity, and criminal justice systems in England and Wales, including serving as the director-level senior civil servant responsible for hate crime policy in the Crown Prosecution Service in London. Based on this experience, together with academic research, I am concerned that if specific issues are not addressed in this proposed hate crime Bill, Ireland risks having ineffective hate crime law. That would be a significant lost legislative opportunity. The other point that I want to make is that I come to this in a balanced, proportionate way. As well as being concerned about victims, I am equally concerned about justice for defendants. I chaired the Irish Penal Reform Trust, the main defender-focused charity focused on prisoner rights and penal reform in Ireland.

The most significant concern relates to head 8 of the general scheme, which deals with determining proof of motivation. The test as laid out is a test of motivation. Proof of committing the offence is sufficient for most criminal offences. The proposal here sets a different legal threshold for hate crime. As far back as December, the Department of Justice acknowledged that this is difficult. It indicates that without a successful way through this, it is unlikely that the new law will be successful. A workable and effective way through this has existed for 20 years in the neighbouring jurisdiction in England and Wales, and for a slightly shorter time in the North of Ireland. The Government risks ignoring effective law in our neighbouring jurisdictions. Instead, the Department of Justice appears to be proposing inclusion of a set of bias indicators, on the face of the hate crime Bill, from which it seems we would cumulatively adduce motivation. From my experience, this is inappropriate, unduly complex and fails to learn from considerable practical experience in our neighbouring jurisdictions. In England and Wales, and the North of Ireland, the determination of whether an offence has a hostility dimension can rests on a legal test of proof based on a hostile motivation and-or evidence of a demonstration of hostility. Some 20 years of implementing such legislation, involving and accompanied by training, guidance, monitoring and reporting, with the exception of disability cases, now shows similar success rates at court to that for regular hate crimes.