Dr. Jennifer Schweppe:

I thank the Chairman and the committee for inviting us. At the European Centre for the Study of Hate we study the treatment of hate crime in the Irish criminal justice process, as well as legislative models to address hate. All of that is grounded in empirical research and comparative legal scholarship. With Professor Ross Macmillan, we have conducted the first ever general population survey of public awareness and beliefs about hate crime, and hate crime legislation in Ireland.

We welcome the publication of the general scheme. Our written submission includes specific suggestions with respect to each head. In this opening statement, we would like to highlight some of the overarching principles we think should guide the committee's scrutiny of the general scheme. First, we all want the legislation to be effective. We propose that we critically reflect on what effective legislation is. We think it is a scheme which achieves a balance of rights between victims and offenders, upholds the principle of certainty, the principle of minimal criminalisation, and the principle of fair labelling and sends a clear message to society that we do not tolerate targeted victimisation.

Second, we believe effective legislation achieves a balance between the need to leverage the declaratory potential of hate crime offences on the one hand, and their potential exclusionary effects on the other. We have shown in our survey of the general population that labelling an individual a "hate criminal" is likely to prove an additional impediment to securing employment, as well as social integration. At the same time, our research on the treatment of hate crime in the criminal justice process shows the creation of aggravated offences is crucial to achieving an integrated system-wide response to hate crime. We believe that these findings underscore the need for a scheme which creates new offences but also establishes a high threshold for conviction, which is present in the general scheme.

Third, in learning from other jurisdictions, we note that while it is possible to later expand the scope and protections afforded by hate crime legislation, it is difficult to contract or remove protections given the message this will send to victims, communities and society at large. For this reason, we commend the cautious, incremental approach taken in the general scheme and further advise a statutory requirement for a legislative review after five years.

Fourth, we emphasise that to be effective the legislation requires a scaffolding of supports for victims, offenders, and criminal justice professionals. In the absence of these implementation measures the legislation may fail.

As a final and fundamental point, we should learn from the experiences of other jurisdictions and draw on international good practice. This should be done carefully, recognising the need to adapt international lessons and examples to our own jurisdiction, and ensuring the general scheme is appropriate to the Irish legal, policy, and social context.

In conclusion, our expertise is, as mentioned, in the area of hater crime and we would like to additionally refer the committee to the submission of the Coalition Against Hate Crime, with specific reference to incitement to hatred. I thank the Chairman. We look forward to answering all the committee's questions.