10


Crime of blasphemy not compatible with freedom of expression


By Séamus Dooley


The NUJ exists to defend journalists and journalism. The union’s objectives are set out in the first rule in our rulebook, and while much has changed since our foundation those principles are immutable. Rule (1) (iii) defines as a key objective, “The


defence and promotion of freedom of the press, broadcasting, speech and information.” As a union representing professional journalists, we have a long tradition of not campaigning directly in elections or referendums. We in the NUJ do not engage in party politics. Our Code of Conduct demands that in their coverage of political campaigns, journalists should not be partisan and must adhere to the standards which have served us well. Objectivity and impartiality are especially important as citizens go to the polls, and there are particular legal constraints placed on public service broadcasters. The forthcoming referendum on blasphemy


differs from previous referendums in that it directly relates to the right to freedom of expression. Article 40.1 (i) deals with fundamental rights and recognises the right of citizens “to express freely their convictions and opinions”. The article is balanced by reference to the need to ensure that organisations of the media shall not use “their rightful liberty of expression” to undermine public order or morality or the authority of the State. It goes on to state: “The publication or


utterance of blasphemous, seditious or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in law.”


On October 26th there will be a referendum on


the removal of that reference to blasphemy. Under the proposed wording the word “blasphemous” will be removed but the section dealing with seditious and indecent matter will be retained. Under the Defamation Act 2009, blasphemy


was made a crime punishable by a €25,000 fine. Until that legislation was introduced there was no law predicated on the constitutional prohibition, so the issue of blasphemy has never been a


burning issue. The NUJ opposed the inclusion of blasphemy in the Defamation Act 2009 and our stand was strongly supported at our Delegate Meeting. In defending the inclusion of blasphemy, the then-Minister for Justice, Dermot Ahern, said the law was intended to ensure consistency with the Constitution. It would have been more logical then to bring


forward a constitutional amendment and there was a solid basis for such a move. The Law Reform Commission's 1991 Report stated that "there is no place for the offence of blasphemous libel in a society which respects freedom of speech", and said the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act 1989 provided an adequate protection for outrage against religious belief. The report of the Oireachtas Constitution


Review Group 1996 concurred, finding that, "The retention of the present constitutional offence of blasphemy is not appropriate.” The motivation for Ahern’s law remains unclear. It would be wrong to give the impression that


the law has undermined the media but the very concept of a blasphemy law in our Republic contradicts our values. Those pluralist values include respect for the right to practice religion. On a broader scale, Islamist states at the


United Nations, led by Pakistan, have called for the wording of Ireland’s law to be introduced internationally, in order to bolster their own laws against blasphemy and apostasy. The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of


Religion and Belief has drawn attention to the fact that these countries favourably cite Ireland’s blasphemy laws in defence of their domestic laws. Defeat of the referendum proposal would be widely welcomed by these extremists. It is for this reason that the NUJ favours the


removal of blasphemy from Bunreacht na hÉireann and the removal of the crime from the Defamation Act 2009. It is important that those who support the


proposition ensure that there is an informed and respectful public debate focused on the right to protect freedom of expression.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20