Read on Twitter
So have you read the other Law Commission consultation, evidence due by 18 December? It is their proposals to improve the protection afforded to victims by the criminal law, while at the same time provide better safeguards for freedom of expression. >>>
https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/project/reform-of-the-communications-offences/
https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/project/reform-of-the-communications-offences/
It is relevant to us in 2 ways:
- As recipients of online communications, do the offences and the move to proof of harm provide protection?
- Will the changes prevent us from campaigning for women's rights and challenging misogyny? >>
- As recipients of online communications, do the offences and the move to proof of harm provide protection?
- Will the changes prevent us from campaigning for women's rights and challenging misogyny? >>
The LC is genderist proposing protections for gender (not sex). It refers to " denial of a person’s gender" (2.28), using gender ideological language including cisgender while failing to define the meaning of gender nor woman, whilst defining NB. >>
The LC is clear Article 10 of the European Convention on
Human Rights are important. “Freedom only to speak
inoffensively is not worth having.” So they aim to address the harms arising from online abuse, while at
the same time better protecting the right to freedom of expression>
Human Rights are important. “Freedom only to speak
inoffensively is not worth having.” So they aim to address the harms arising from online abuse, while at
the same time better protecting the right to freedom of expression>
There are lots of references to Harry Miller's @WeAreFairCop case, and @jk_rowling 's tweets and how to balance freedom of expression and protection from harm.
The proposals include a new offence to replace the communications offences (the Malicious Communications Act 1988 (MCA 1988) and the Communications Act 2003 (CA 2003)), to criminalise behaviour where a communication would likely cause harm. >>
This would cover emails, social media posts and WhatsApp messages, intranet posts or by bluetooth and pile-on harassment (when a number of different individuals send harassing communications to a victim). >>
The proposals include introduction of the requirement of proof of likely harm. Currently, neither proof of likely harm nor proof of actual harm are required under the existing communications offences. >>
They propose 5 categories of harms:
1) psychological and emotional harms;
2) physiological harms, including suicide and self‑harm;
3) exclusion from public online space and corresponding feelings of isolation;
4) economic harms; and
5) wider societal harms
1) psychological and emotional harms;
2) physiological harms, including suicide and self‑harm;
3) exclusion from public online space and corresponding feelings of isolation;
4) economic harms; and
5) wider societal harms
The LC says "Cyber-flashing – the unsolicited sending of images or video recordings of one’s genitals – should be included as a sexual offence under section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. This would ensure that additional protections for victims are available.">>
"Cyberflashing can cause serious harm. It is often experienced as a form of sexual harassment, involving coercive sexual intrusion by men into women’s everyday lives."
"Raising the threshold for false communications so that it would only be an offence if the defendant knows the post is false, they are intending to cause non‑trivial emotional, psychological, or physical harm, and if they have no excuse." >>
"We would like to hear from as many stakeholders as possible, including social media companies, criminal law practitioners, human rights and civil liberties groups, and people who have been subjected to online abuse and the service providers who support them." >>
Women have been prosecuted and convicted under the existing legislation. It has been to prosecute men harassing women. This is complex reform that matters - with 30 consultation questions over 8 pages.
Make time to consider it and respond. //
Make time to consider it and respond. //
