answer text |
<p>Baroness Vere of Norbiton wrote to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) on
13 December 2017. The DPP provided her response on 9 January 2018.</p><p>In her response,
the DPP confirmed that the flagging definition for hate crime was agreed between the
CPS and the NPCC (ACPO as it was then) in 2007 and that it is wider than the definition
set out in legislation to ensure all relevant cases are captured.</p><p>The CPS adopted
the recommended definition in the Macpherson report published in 1999 as a result
of the inquiry into the murder of Stephen Lawrence. The Macpherson report also recommended
that ‘this definition should be universally adopted by the Police, local Government
and other relevant agencies’.</p><p>This recommendation in the Macpherson report was
welcomed by the Government at the time and the current Government remains in support
of this position. The CPS has worked with police to implement the recommended definition
across all strands of hate crime. The CPS takes tackling hate crime seriously and
recognises the need to increase public confidence to report. The flagging definition
is important in achieving this aim.</p><p>In order for a crime to be charged and prosecuted
as a hate crime, the CPS uses the legal definitions contained in the Crime and Disorder
Act 1998 (CDA 1998) and the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003). This means that
not every incident that the victim or another person has perceived to be a hate crime
will actually be a hate crime in law.</p><p>In her letter, the DPP also confirmed
that the CPS legal guidance recognises the potential impact of prosecutions on Article
10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to freedom of expression).
The CPS must balance the rights of an individual to freedom of speech against the
duty of the state to act proportionately and to protect the rights of others.</p><p><strong>
</strong></p>
|
|