HUMZA Yousaf and a Tory MSP are caught in a Twitter row after the Justice Secretary hit out at a “ludicrous” article on the Scottish Government’s Hate Crime Bill.
The blog post from notorious Unionist Twitter account Effie Deans claimed that the SNP planned to reintroduce the offence of blasphemy and expressed concern that under the bill they may be “no free speech at all in Scotland”.
The Justice Secretary reposted the article on Twitter, showcasing it as one of “many daft takes” on the bill. He pointed out the bill scraps the blasphemy law and features a freedom of expression law which enshrines the right to criticise religion, but also protects people from religious hatred and applies to people of all religions equally.
He went on: “Oh and one look at the comments below this ludicrous article shows why we need laws to protect against religious hatred. Islamaphobia on the comments on @Effiedeans thread just prove the point of the need for this Bill.”
Oh and one look at the comments below this ludicrous article shows why we need laws to protect against religious hatred. Islamaphobia on the comments on @Effiedeans thread just prove the point of the need for this Bill. https://t.co/ZNpnIDRt5I
— Humza Yousaf (@HumzaYousaf) May 4, 2020
However this morning MSP Murdo Fraser took issue with Yousaf’s tweets, and reposted what the Justice Secretary had written about Islamophobia in the replies.
Fraser wrote: “The ratio on this tweet tells you everything you need to know about public attitudes towards the dangerous elements of the Hate Crimes Bill. Free speech is under threat.”
The ratio on this tweet tells you everything you need to know about public attitudes towards the dangerous elements of the Hate Crimes Bill. Free speech is under threat. https://t.co/m52wvJ5o9C
— Murdo Fraser (@murdo_fraser) May 5, 2020
Yousaf hit back at the MSP, calling his comment “awful”. The Justice Secretary wrote: “I mention blatant Islamaphobia/racism (see examples below) on a thread of a right-wing article (riddled with complete inaccuracies btw) his only response is to endorse said article & suggest free speech is under threat? Thanks for the solidarity colleague...”
When Fraser called that response “woeful” and accused the Justice Secretary of failing to understand his own bill, Yousaf argued that if you replaced the word “Muslim” in some of he comments he’d received with alternative identities “there would be no question that they are racist/antisemitic”. He said he was “astounded” by the Tory MSP’s defence of them as free speech.
Wont say more on this but replace words "Muslim" in these tweets with "Black" or "Jew" and there would be no question that they are racist/anti-semitic. I am astounded by Murdo's defence of them as free speech.
— Humza Yousaf (@HumzaYousaf) May 5, 2020
No concerns abt criticising religion, shouldn't cross into hatred. https://t.co/7cv4J4AOob
The row continued with Fraser again insisting the Justice Secretary did not understand the legislation and Yousaf calling his claims “beyond patronising”.
According to the Scottish Government, the Hate Crime Bill which has been introduced to the Parliament is committed to updating legislation to the 21st century.
READ MORE: New Scottish hate crime laws will include age discrimination
In Scotland offences are currently aggravated by prejudice against a victim’s race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or their transgender status – but if passed the proposed legislation would add the characteristic of age with the potential to include sex at a later date.
The bill would also make “stirring up of hatred” extend to all characteristics rather than just race.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel