THE much-criticised legislation on offensive behaviour at football matches enjoy surprisingly high approval ratings from the public, according to research published yesterday.
A YouGov poll revealed that 83 per cent of Scots support laws to tackle offensive behaviour at football matches and 80 per cent of those polled directly support the Offensive Behaviour and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act.
The findings prompted anti-sectarian campaign group Nil By Mouth to call for Scottish football to introduce the Uefa standard of Strict Liability rules, which penalise clubs if their fans commit offensive behaviour offences.
Repealing the Act was one of the early pledges made by Jim Murphy, the soon-to-be-former Labour leader, who felt it criminalised ordinary supporters.
That he was out of touch with public opinion on this issue is demonstrated by the fact that a ScotCen research study has found that 90 per cent of football fans found songs which glorify or celebrate the loss of life or serious injury offensive.
Meanwhile 82 per cent found songs in support of terrorist organisations offensive, and 85 per cent found songs, chants and shouting about people’s religious background or beliefs offensive.
The latest statistics on prosecutions under the Act showed that in 2014-15, there were 193 charges of “offensive” behaviour at regulated football matches – a 6 per cent decrease on last year.
Some 30 per cent of these charges related to “hateful behaviour” – a decrease from 36 per cent last year – while 13 per cent of the charges related to “otherwise offensive behaviour” such as celebrating the loss of life or action in support of terrorist organisations, representing a decrease from 28 per cent in the previous year. In 71 per cent of charges in 2014-15, the general community was the target of abuse – an increase from 58 per cent last year.
Some 42 charges included behaviour that was derogatory towards Roman Catholicism, a decrease from 46 charges last year and 88 charges in 2012-13.
Six charges included behaviour derogatory towards Protestantism, a decrease from 11 last year and 16 charges in 2012-13.
One charge included behaviour derogatory towards Judaism and one charge was in relation to behaviour derogatory to Islam.
Minister for Community Safety Paul Wheelhouse yesterday announced £66,883 of funding to roll out a national “Diversion from Prosecution” education programme to be aimed at less serious and first time offenders.
The minister said: “We have seen a raft of encouraging statistics and evidence published today showing that hate crimes in Scotland are on the decrease, both on the streets of Scotland and in our football grounds and this is to be welcomed.
“Religious crimes are down, race crimes are down, crimes in relation to sexuality are down and we’ve seen a decrease in crimes of offensive behaviour at regulated football matches in Scotland.
“While the legislation we brought in two years ago has had its critics, the latest statistics show a steady decline in offences at stadiums.”
Nil by Mouth campaign director Dave Scott (above) said: “This research highlights that the vast majority of people in Scotland want to see an end to bigotry in our football stadiums.
“However, on Monday we once again saw the Scottish game bury its head in the sand on this issue by refusing to even debate ‘ strict liability’ at its AGM.
“This despite the Scottish Government’s own Advisory Group on Sectarianism backing Nil by Mouth’s call for it to be introduced into the game.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here