Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Ms Connie Egan on 8 June 2026.

MLA

Ms Connie Egan

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

8 June 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5600839

Read the official Assembly record

Text

This is a really interesting group of amendments, and they cover a lot of ground. Many of them can bring a lot of strength to our justice system in Northern Ireland. I will begin with Minister Long's proposals regarding the creation of new organised crime offences. We need to work together across our society to do all that we can to tackle the hold that organised crime, paramilitary or otherwise, has on our communities. I am proud to be in Alliance — a party that priorities tackling that at every turn. Whether it is damage to property, intimidation and coercion, hate crime, financial crime or threats to life, such behaviour has no place in our communities. With that being said, Alliance welcomes the amendments relating to organised crime from Minister Long.

As she said in her opening remarks on the group, those new offences will create additional tools for law enforcement.

Amendment No 46 brings a new clause to the Bill that creates an offence of participating in the criminal activities of an organised crime group. Amendment No 47 creates an offence of directing those criminal activities. People who willingly participate in or direct criminal activities need to face the appropriate consequences. The significant penalties that are associated with those offences send a clear message from the Assembly that organised crime will not be tolerated. I am particularly proud to propose amendment No 73 in the group, which abolishes the offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in Northern Ireland. That is a long-standing policy position of the Alliance Party. The fact that we still have blasphemy legislation on the statute books is outrageous to me, especially as this society does so much to promote freedom to practise, and freedom from, religion. We are the sole outlier on these islands where it is still the case. The legislation itself dates back to the 1800s. The legislation that I am targeting specifically with that removal includes sections from the Criminal Libel Act 1819, the Libel Act 1843, the Newspaper Libel and Registration Act 1881 and the Law of Libel Amendment Act 1888, as well as blasphemy common law offences. I am not tabling the amendment to target or to scare any religious group into feeling that they are not welcome in Northern Ireland. I have been deliberate in ensuring that it does not leave any vulnerabilities or gaps in protections for those who practise and value their faith here. We have a solid evidence base that we can look to in the rest of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, as they have removed blasphemy from their statute books. I am confident that, if the amendment is passed, there will be no unforeseen consequences. I thank the Bill Office team for supporting me in the drafting of my amendment and everyone who has engaged with me. Whilst there is no formal statutory duty to engage with stakeholders when tabling an amendment to an Executive Bill, I wanted the input of many across the region. They included many leaders of religious groups in Northern Ireland, such as the different Christian denominations, the Interfaith Forum, the Northern Ireland Humanists, the Evangelical Alliance and the National Secular Society. The positive reception from, and constructive dialogue with, all those groups and individuals on that and many other matters have been most welcome and incredibly valuable. One of the questions that I was asked most during those consultation meetings was whether that legislation had ever actually been used for a prosecution in Northern Ireland. I, and many others, have looked into that. The answer is no. Instead, we have other laws that are used, such as the Public Order (Northern Ireland) Order 1987, which includes the criminal offence of incitement to religious hatred. I want to make it clear that my amendment will not affect that. The question that then follows is this: why do it? Why remove that offence that is never used? When I engaged with the police, I asked what would happen if someone rang them and reported blasphemy as a crime. They confirmed to me that they would have to investigate it and send a file to the PPS for consideration. I am sure that I am not the only one in the Chamber who thinks that there are better things that our Police Service could be doing.

I agree. What the amendment does is send a strong message from the Chamber that we believe in freedom to practise, and freedom from, religion. I will come on to that in my next point. One of the key reasons why I wanted to table the amendment was to promote equal standards of faith protections globally. Across the world, many people are persecuted for their faith under blasphemy laws. Earlier this year, I, alongside other MLAs, attended the launch of the 2026 Open Doors' World Watch List, which highlighted serious concerns from countries across the globe, such as Iran, Libya and Yemen, where Christians are being persecuted for practising their faith. As the Justice Minister already highlighted, the UK Government must be able to intervene and send a strong message that that persecution is totally unacceptable. The existence of blasphemy and blasphemous libel as offences in Northern Ireland creates a hypocrisy. It diminishes the weight of the UK's vital interventions in that space. I hope that I have the support of all parties and Members to finally abolish those archaic provisions. Amendment No 70, tabled by the Justice Minister, repeals section 4 of the 1824 Vagrancy Act and the 1847 Vagrancy (Ireland) Act. Those Acts contain more archaic offences that have no place in a modern society. Homelessness needs a social welfare response, not a criminal one. Those Acts' provisions operate only to criminalise a wide range of poverty-related behaviours, including criminalising rough sleeping in Northern Ireland. They do not represent what I, my party and the majority of people across this region think about homelessness. There was plenty of discussion on that in the Justice Committee evidence sessions. During those, we found out that the PSNI does not currently enforce vagrancy provisions, which, again, highlights their outdated nature. It is important that we do not criminalise people who are simply begging and not otherwise engaging in behaviour that would result in a criminal offence. In our Committee sessions, we also heard feedback from Retail NI and the business sector, which put forward concerns about criminal activity in that regard. Alliance will support amendment Nos 71 and 72, tabled by DUP colleagues, which create offences of trespassing with intent to commit a criminal offence and of arranging or facilitating begging for gain, if amendment No 70 is passed. Otherwise, we believe that that could put vulnerable people at further risk. As vice-chair of the all-party group on modern slavery and sexual exploitation, I welcome amendment No 78 and thank the Members for tabling it. In the APG, we are undertaking an inquiry relating to adult services websites and the role of online platforms in facilitating trafficking and non-consensual sexual activity, which is abuse. I will never forget what I have heard in those evidence sessions about the horror and violence that is inflicted primarily upon women and teenage girls. I join the Justice Minister in paying tribute to Rebecca Whyte. Rebecca Whyte has been incredibly brave in sharing her story. I thank her for coming to the all-party group. She shares her story to help other women who are in the same situation that she and Caitlin Hanna were in. I hope that the amendment being passed today will give them some comfort that we are listening and acting. Through our work on the APG, we heard much evidence relating to online platforms that are used to pimp out victims, usually women, and move them around the island systematically in order for them to be exploited. That movement is done to ensure that the perpetrators do not get caught but also because the victims are so beyond commodification that those who buy the services want someone new every week. The amendment creates an offence of advertising sexual services for payment, including online — on websites or social media, for example — when those services will be provided by another person. Importantly, it also brings in coercion: when the person has been coerced into offering sexual services for payment. It covers cases where women have been trafficked and where they are being coerced. Alliance is of the impression that those measures will help reduce sexual exploitation across the island and assist law enforcement with bringing to justice those who cause such egregious harm. I now move to the DUP amendments that seek to introduce Ruby's law to Northern Ireland. Domestic violence and abuse have no place in our society. Coercive control of any kind, including through the use of animals, is insidious. All of us, across the Assembly, must condemn it. Amendment No 88 amends the 1998 Family Homes and Domestic Violence (Northern Ireland) Order in order to explicitly recognise as a form of coercive control harm or threats to harm companion animals. My Alliance Party colleagues and I plan to support that amendment to civil law, and I thank the Members for tabling it. From my understanding, the DUP's latter amendment on that matter is split into two parts, the first of which amends the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (Northern Ireland) to specify:

"behaviour directed at or in relation to an animal"

as behaviour amounting to domestic abuse.

I appreciate the intent behind that, but I want to recognise the fact that our legislation in Northern Ireland was designed in the first place not to specify types of abusive behaviour for this reason: to create a broad and flexible definition of domestic abuse that could include such factors as the abuse of or threats to pets as a tool of coercion and control from the outset. The second part looks at including animals in domestic abuse protection notices (DAPNs) and domestic abuse protection orders (DAPOs). That also ensures that the regulation of DAPOs takes an approach that is consistent with some civil orders, including non-molestation orders. I was glad to hear the proposer of the amendments, Paul Frew, agree to work with the Justice Minister and her Department to ensure that we can get the legislation right, because it is a really important issue. The use of animals in domestic abuse is completely unacceptable, and we need to make sure that those protections are there. I welcome that, and, hopefully, we will come back to it at Further Consideration Stage to ensure that we get the legislation right. It will be beneficial, and, for that reason, the Alliance Party supports the amendments.

1,791 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:56 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification