POLICE Scotland has denied going over the top in policing a protest at a Scots football ground calling for the scrapping of a controversial anti-bigotry law designed to stamp out offensive behaviour at matches in Scotland.
Protest group Fans Against Criminalisation has raised concerns about the level of policing for their banner demonstration and says it is lodging a complaint saying banners bound for Douglas Park, Hamilton on Sunday were banned and confiscated.
The row over the free speech restrictions at Douglas Park on Sunday comes as a petition signed by more than 9000 people on online and paper forms objecting to the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 will be handed to the Scottish Parliament's petitions' committee on Tuesday.
We're at the football is this really necessary? @FACKilltheBill pic.twitter.com/vtWoq4BQq2
— Chris (@hamiltontim88) October 4, 2015
While FAC say that they can provide witnesses who state that police confiscated some banners, Police Scotland deny they were involved in any banner ban.
"Police Scotland did not confiscate any banners at the Hamilton v Celtic match on Sunday 4 October 2015," said a police spokesman.
"As with all large events, the match was policed appropriately to ensure a safe and secure environment for spectators."
After the police denial, FAC produced a picture taken by one fan protester which it says shows one police officer allegedly confiscating a banner.
FAC organised the protest before and during Hamilton's defeat at the hands of Celtic on Sunday as they continue their opposition to the Act on the grounds that it is "fundamentally illiberal and unnecessarily restricts freedom of expression".
The Scottish Government pushed through the Act in a bid to get tough on sectarianism in the aftermath of the Old Firm 'shame game' in 2011.
FAC say that among the banners confiscated from fans who were trying to display them in the ground, were one that said: "SNPolice Scotland. FoCUS on your Failings Not on Football."
Fans said the banner was taken by police after they had tried to display it in the ground by throwing it over an outside fence, after being turned away from the turnstile. They say they were told by police they could pick the banner up from Hamilton police office.
The FAC said they believed the banners which formed part of a "legitimate protest" were stopped because they were "too political" and argued that free speech was "prevented" yet again. It has also complained that at least one riot police van was in attendance.
Riot van used to move a few young ones watching the game....is this how Scottish taxpayers want their money spent? pic.twitter.com/hUjR7LrGsR
— FAC (@FACKilltheBill) October 4, 2015
Jeanette Findlay of FAC said: "The reaction of the police was way over the top."
Michael McMahon, the MSP for Uddingston and Bellshill, who was concerned about the reports says he is to hold a meeting with Lanarkshire area police chiefs on Friday over what happened on Sunday.
"We have the immediate situation with the protest and why free speech is prevented in Scotland," he said. "I have spoken to a number of people about what happened.
"I have to take on face value what people are telling me. I am told that there is the evidence.
"And I am genuinely concerned about what I think is a culture developing in the way police treat football fans."
Hamilton Accies fan Sean McHugh said he had two protest banners confiscated at the turnstile by stewards who said it was "on the advice of police".
@FACKilltheBill dear @acciesfc care to explain why banners were confiscated today ? Police advising it was advice from you
— Sean McHugh (@Sean1874) October 4, 2015
His banners said: "Supporting your team is not a crime." And another said: "Police Scotland Ruining Scottish Football since 2012 #AxetheAct."
The legislation gives police and prosecutors powers to tackle sectarian songs and abuse at and around football matches, as well as threats posted on the internet or through the mail.
It created two distinct offences, punishable through a range of penalties up to a maximum five years in prison and an unlimited fine.
But many football fans believe it has needlessly criminalised supporters and that the police already had plenty of powers under existing laws to deal with any issues arising at a football match.
The Scottish Human Rights Commission has previously raised the "potential lack of legal certainty" over the Act as required by Articles six and seven of the ECHR during the legislation's formation
It highlighted European Court of Human Right cases which found: "An offence must be clearly defined in law. This condition is satisfied where the individual can know from the wording of the relevant provision and, if need be, with the assistance of the court's interpretation of it, what acts and omissions will make him liable.
SHRC also stressed the fundamental importance of the right to freedom of expression and the role of Parliament in ensuring that the restrictions on this right contained in the Bill met the tests of legality, legitimate aim and proportionality.
Police were hassling life out of young Hamilton fans. Supporting your team not a crime was sung by both sets of fans pic.twitter.com/YceuMa85qR
— Tartan Army (@TartanArmyFans) October 4, 2015
Almost half of all people taken to court last year under the laws designed to stamp out sectarian abuse at football matches were acquitted, figures show
But aYouGov survey, unveiled by the Scottish Government in June showed that 80 per cent of Scots support the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act
The government-supported evaluation of the Act said there has been a "marked decline" in football-related criminal charges since its introduction four years ago. But the study says it is "impossible to determine" whether some, or any of these reductions are attributable directly to the Act
Hamilton Accies were approached for comment.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel