Debate contribution: Intergovernmental Agreement on Cooperation on Criminal Justice Matters

Debate contribution by Mrs Linda Dillon on .

MLA
Mrs Linda Dillon
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
23 June 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Ministerial Statement
Heading
Intergovernmental Agreement on Cooperation on Criminal Justice Matters
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5045795

Read the official Assembly record

Text

In the conversations on victims and witnesses, particularly on domestic abuse and sexual violence, was there discussion of the giving of character references to those accused of such crimes and of maybe doing something more into line with what they do in the South, where character referees have to take the stand, which means that they are aware of what the person for whom they are giving the character reference has been accused?

73 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: 0.06 (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 (0.89).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
  • 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.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.04No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.04No
Controversy escalation0.06No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.89Yes
Overall judgement0.06At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.76
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.14
No identity-related subject0.10
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:48 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