Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Ms Emma Sheerin on 15 June 2026.

MLA: Ms Emma Sheerin
Party at the time: Sinn Féin
Date: 15 June 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Executive Committee Business
Heading: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5614773

Text

I thank the Member for giving way again; he has been very generous with his time. I understand his concerns about what might almost be called the arbitrary nature of the listed offences. All of this is a balancing act, and we chose offences, as the exceptions to the rule, that held the maximum penalty because they are the most extreme offences. We are coming at it from the position that these are children, acknowledging that most children do not understand the fullness of what they have done or been accused of. We are trying to provide intervention as opposed to punishment. These are the most extreme cases. We are not trying to legislate for everybody on the basis of some extremities. These are very rare cases. That is the rationale behind the particular offences that carry the maximum penalty available, acknowledging the severity of those particular offences.
Will the Member give way?
I thank the Member for giving way. I would like to correct the record, because I did not make that assertion, and the Member knows that full well. Someone said earlier — I think that it was Sian — that the most fitting tribute that we can make to any victim of crime is to ensure that that crime is not inflicted on anyone else. It is not because of the risk of public uproar; it is in recognition of the fact that some offences are so dangerous that we would not like to risk someone else falling victim to the same crime. That is the rationale behind it, not fear of public uproar. That is an awful thing for the Member to have said.
Will the Member give way?
I thank the Member for giving way. The reason why we brought this proposed legislative change is to prevent crime. The data tells us that the younger a person enters the criminal justice system and the younger they are systemised, the more likely they are to continue in a cycle of crime. The whole point of this is prevention rather than punishment. As with my earlier point, if young people received appropriate relationships and sexuality education in school and were properly taught about the appropriateness of relationships, we would not have the threat or the risk of downblousing or upskirting. That is something that we have as a result of young children not being properly taught about appropriate relationships. It is always better to teach our young people rather than punish them.

415 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.11 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.88).
No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
Question	Probability	Met?
Identity framing	0.05	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.04	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.02	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.08	No
Controversy escalation	0.13	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.88	Yes
Overall judgement	0.11	At or below not-flagging threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.99
Reports or questions it	0.00
Criticises or condemns it	0.01
Adopts it	0.00

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups	0.48
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues	0.41
No identity-related subject	0.11
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials	0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations	0.00

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