Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

After this Bill goes through Report Stage in the Dáil, when it goes to the Seanad, the Minister of State might look at this. Being convicted of a hate crime would have very serious consequences for any individual. I fear we could find ourselves in a situation whereby younger people and young adults find themselves being convicted of a hate crime. If they are convicted of a hate crime at, say, 20 years of age, and I know the spent convictions legislation may apply to it ultimately, it would have a very significant impact on them in their 20s.

A very good definition is set out in the amendment we are looking at. It speaks about how a crime would be aggravated by hatred if it is motivated. That is set out in paragraph (b) of the section we are looking at. What is being proposed here, and what some consideration should be given to, is the removal of what is in paragraph (a), which is the demonstration test. Where one has demonstration, if the person who has been charged with this is to be convicted, they will need to intend to demonstrate hatred. There must be a causative link between the offence that has been committed and the demonstration of that hatred.

The concern I have, which has been alluded to by other speakers, is that there could be a situation whereby two young guys in their 20s could get into a fight. There may be no motivation in respect of hatred giving rise to the fight but after the fight, one of them may make a racist slur to the other. As a result of that, even though he was not motivated by hatred to commit the crime, he would suffer the consequence of being convicted of that, because after the offence he made a racist slur.

Deputy Pa Daly made a valid point, because there could be a situation whereby the other person does not make a racist slur but could make an offensive slur about something that is not protected by one of the grounds protected in the legislation. Then there would be two people who have committed the same offence. Both of them would have made slurs against each other. However, one slur, because it is regarded as being more offensive than the other, would result in that person getting a longer sentence.

The Minister of State knows I support the legislation. It is good legislation. However, we must ensure the offender must be wholly or partially motivated by hatred in committing the offence. They must not merely be someone who used a racist term during or just after the offence. Neither the Minister of State nor anyone else wants to see this legislation result in people getting convictions, which would hang over them for many years to come. Obviously, if it is put to a vote, I will be supporting the Government in respect of this. However, when it gets to the Seanad, it would be worthwhile to give some consideration to this. I say this because the demonstration test has a very low threshold for the purpose of somebody being convicted of what is quite a serious offence.

See this speech in context