Celtic fan’s sectarian song charge recalled to court

A Celtic fan who was acquitted of breaching controversial anti-bigotry legislation is to face prosecution again following a ruling by appeal judges that Holyrood had created a criminal offence “with an extremely long reach”.
A Celtic fan acquitted of singing a pro-IRA song is back in court over the charge. Picture: Robert PerryA Celtic fan acquitted of singing a pro-IRA song is back in court over the charge. Picture: Robert Perry
A Celtic fan acquitted of singing a pro-IRA song is back in court over the charge. Picture: Robert Perry

Joseph Cairns (20) earlier stood trial this year after denying taking part in behaviour which would be likely to incite public disorder by chanting songs in support of a banned terrorist organisation.

Police officers on duty at a Scottish Premier League match between Highland club Ross County and Celtic on August 18 last year gave evidence that Cairns could be seen singing lyrics from “The Roll of Honour”, a song about Republican hunger strikers, and “The Boys of the Old Brigade”, a pro-IRA song.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

But Cairns, of Colintraive Avenue, Hogganfield, Glasgow, was acquitted of the offence by Sheriff Jamie Gilchrist QC after a no case to answer submission was made at the trial at Dingwall Sheriff Court.

Prosecutors appealed against the decision and judges at the Justiciary Appeal Court in Edinburgh have now recalled the acquittal and sent the case back to the sheriff to proceed with it.

The sheriff had taken the view that the Crown had led evidence which, taken at its highest, was enough to prove that he had sung songs the words of which expressed praise for hunger strikers and contained a line about joining the IRA.

He said: “It was quite conceivable that a reasonable person attending the match would consider it offensive if he were to hear such words in the course of trying to watch a football match between two Scottish clubs on a Saturday afternoon in Dingwall.”

But he said the Crown also had to prove that the behaviour was likely to incite public disorder or would be likely to incite public disorder.

The sheriff had said that video evidence made it “abundantly clear” that Cairns, and a great many other Celtic supporters, could be seen singing songs.

But he added: “It was quite impossible for the uninitiated listener to make out the words of what they were singing.”

“Since there was no proper basis for inferring that any person who might be incited to disorder would have been able to tell that he was singing about the hunger strikers and the IRA, there was equally no proper basis for inferring that his behaviour was likely to incite public disorder,” said the sheriff.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

But Lord Brodie, who heard the appeal with Lady Paton and Lord Philip, said they could not agree with the sheriff’s conclusion and that he had fallen into error.

“long-reach”

Lord Brodie said that in enacting the initial clause of the offensive behaviour at football matches legislation the Scottish Parliament had “created a criminal offence with an extremely long reach”.

Advocate depute Andrew Brown QC had argued that if the police officers were able to recognise the song and hear words, other people must have been able to do so.

Lord Brodie said the Scottish Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications law distinguished between “a reasonable person” on the one hand and a person “likely to be incited to public disorder”.

The judge said: “It may be that a person likely to be incited to public disorder is of a more volatile temperament than a reasonable person or, to use the language of the sheriff, an uninitiated member of the public.”

“The person likely to be incited to public disorder may have particular interests and particular knowledge. He may have particular views about the two songs in question and those who sing them,” said the judge.

Lord Brodie said the legislation provided that such people need not be present for the purposes of deciding whether specific behaviour would be likely to incite public disorder.

“As it does not matter whether persons likely to be incited to public disorder are there in sufficient numbers or are there at all it cannot matter whether or not the persons who are present (whether likely to be incited to public disorder or otherwise) actually became aware of the relevant behaviour,” he said.