Why my 2-year battle with Police Scotland over ‘non-crime hate incidents’ will continue despite their apology
After securing an apology from the police for recording a non-crime hate incident against his name – but not against JK Rowling or Humza Yousaf – Murdo Fraser says the whole policy of non-crime hate incidents must be scrapped
Last week, after a two-year legal battle, I received an unreserved apology from Police Scotland for unfair treatment in relation to the recording of a ‘non-crime hate incident’ in connection with a social media post of mine in 2023. It was a welcome conclusion to a long-running complaint which has taken too much of my time to pursue, but leaves unresolved wider issues with police policy towards so-called hate crimes.
It started when I shared on Twitter/X an article written by my fellow Scotsman columnist Susan Dalgety which was critical of the Scottish Government for producing a “non-binary action plan”. Susan is an outspoken critic of SNP gender policy, and she argued this was not an appropriate use of government resources. In the post, I commented that identifying as non-binary is as valid as identifying as a cat, and I didn’t believe governments should be spending time producing action plans for either.
Bizarre as it may seem, there are people who identify as cats, and fortunately we have not yet seen a Scottish Government proposal that they should be given special treatment. Logically, however, if the government is going to recognise being non-binary (which is equally just a set of feelings rather than anything with any scientific or biological background) as something that requires specific recognition, then what’s the argument against recognising those who identify as another species, however absurd that may appear?
Alleged ‘offender’ not told
My tweet so offended a trans-rights activist that he reported it to Police Scotland as a hate crime. The police determined no crime had been committed, but nevertheless in line with their policy recorded a “non-crime hate incident”. Such records are made based purely on the perception of the complainer; the police make no attempt to contact the alleged ‘offender’, nor is there any objective test applied before an incident is recorded.
It was only by accident that I found out about this, when the complainer went to the Ethical Standards Commissioner to raise a further complaint against me for an alleged breach of parliament’s Code of Conduct. This was, inevitably, rejected, the Commissioner wrote to me to advise me of his actions, and I had the complainer’s name.
It was almost exactly two years ago that I raised my initial complaint with Police Scotland. It took months for them to reply, and when I escalated the matter to a more formal complaint, with the generous support of the Free Speech Union, again it was months before a detailed response was received rejecting all my concerns.
I then took the matter to the Police Investigations Review Commissioner (Pirc), with the benefit of detailed legal advice. In March this year, Pirc ruled the police had not responded to my complaints in a satisfactory fashion, and ordered them to reconsider the matter and give me fuller responses within two months.
Opposition MSP treated different to SNP one
Last week, I finally received a detailed complaint response, eight months overdue, with a 14-page letter giving a detailed explanation for the police’s actions. It is this letter that contains the unreserved apology to me about my complaint that I was treated differently from other high-profile individuals against whom allegations had been made to the police.
I was referring specifically to writer JK Rowling and the then SNP First Minister Humza Yousaf, both of whom had been complained against, but the police had not recorded non-crime hate incidents, suggesting their policy had been inconsistently applied in my case. It was of particular concern to me that I, as an opposition parliamentarian, had been treated differently from a member of the SNP government, and I’m pleased Police Scotland have now recognised this point.
I am enormously grateful to the Free Speech Union, without whose support and financial resources I simply would not have been able to pursue the matter. I’m also very conscious of the fact that, as an MSP, I have a platform which allows me to press these matters in a much more vigorous fashion than an ordinary member of the public might be able to do.
I have been able to raise questions in parliament, meet with senior members of Police Scotland, engage the chair of the Scottish Police Authority, and access expert legal advice. I have to reflect that, even with all those advantages, the whole process has taken two years of my time and an enormous amount of effort, and I shudder to think how someone without access to the resources at my disposal might have fared in similar circumstances.
Police have better things to do
Although the Police Scotland apology is welcome, the force continues to defend the lawfulness of the policy of recording non-crime hate incidents. I find it difficult to understand how this policy can now continue to be justified.
The statistical data on these records, based as they are purely on the perception of the complainer without any objective test, must be of very limited value. Of greater concern is the fact that this whole system is now clearly open to manipulation and abuse by those making politically motivated complaints.
Virtually every day in my position, I hear concerns from members of the public about the lack of visibility of police in our communities or the perception that minor crimes are no longer taken seriously. When police resources are stretched, I cannot see why time is being spent taking notes of injured feelings due to comments on social media.
I may have scored a victory over Police Scotland in relation to one complaint, but I will not rest easy until the whole policy of non-crime hate incidents is scrapped and police resources are instead devoted to tackling real crimes.
Murdo Fraser is a Scottish Conservative MSP for Mid-Scotland and Fife