You are here: Home » Featured » Irish Blasphemers Unlikely to be Prosecuted

Irish Blasphemers Unlikely to be Prosecuted

by CanuckJacq

The quotations published on the website blasphemy.ie are unlikely to inspire prosecution under Ireland‘s new Blasphemy Law, according to Dr Fiona de Londras, lecturer in University College Dublin School of Law.

The contraversial new law took effect on January 1st, 2010 and criminalises the publication or utterance of blasphemous material. To qualify under this law, the material must be so “grossly abusive or insulting” that it causes “outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion.” There also must be proof that the person intended to cause the outrage.

Further, if the defendent can “prove that a reasonable person would find genuine literary, artistic, political, scientific, or academic value in the matter to which the offence relates,” then it isn’t blasphemous under the law either. Dr de Londras explains that “the offence is so narrowly constructed that it would be extremely difficult to establish that someone has fulfilled all the requirements.”

The day before the new law took effect, the website blasphemy.ie published 25 quotations from politicians, artists, actors, public figures, scientists and journalists. In Dr de Londras’ opinion, none of these quotations would be likely to bring about a prosecution on the basis of blasphemy because many aren’t actually insulting to any sacred subjects, there has not been any outrage expressed by religious groups and “the reasonable person would find genuine political value in the matter.”

The government introduced the law as part of the Defamation Act 2009 in order to comply with article 41 of the Irish Constitution which limits freedom of expression in cases of blasphemy, sedition or indecency. A law had existed previously but had been deemed to be overly ambiguous by the Supreme Court. While the government had the option of calling a referendum to change the constitution, thereby giving the population the opportunity to remove this restriction on their freedom of expression, they decided against it.