The Irish hate speech bill is not only unconstitutional (see Article 40), "it contains some very questionable provisions. It is described as a bill to protect, but it has the capacity to do immense damage to free speech and democracy in Ireland". ~ Baroness Nuala O'Loan, former police ombudsman in Northern Ireland. The maximum penalty for this offence is 5 years in jail.

This Hate Speech Bill also goes against your inalienable, God-given rights:

Click here for full list list of inalienable (unalienable) rights. These have all been proven in international Supreme Courts.

• The right to life, freedom , health and the pursuit of happiness
• We have the right to be presumed innocent, suffering no detention or arrest, no search or seizure without reasonable cause
• The right to privacy and confidentiality, free from unwarranted invasion
• The right to express knowledge necessary to one's rights and freedoms
• The right to live in peace and to be left alone when law-abiding
• The right to remain silent when accused, to avoid self-incrimination

These rights are also also protected by Article 10 in The European Convention on Human Rights. "

• The right to peaceful association, assembly, expression and protest" Click here for full details.

Points to consider:

• Minister Helen McEntee has repeatedly failed to comply with Senators' requests to define "hate speech" and "hatred".
• This Bill gives An Garda Siochana the right to enter your home without warrant and confiscate all the electronic devices on the premises, including your visitors and children's. You are then obliged to supply all passwords, and if you refuse, you will face a custodial prison sentence.
• Is there a need for this Bill when there are currently laws that protect Irish people from incitement to violence? Will this Criminal Justice Bill (above) will give way to Government overreach?
• Do the numerous laws being enacted each year benefit society? If not, who actually benefits from them?
• If the Hate Speech Bill is passed it will be used with the 'Online Safety and Media Regulation Act 2022'. Coimisiún na Meán holds media platforms to account to implement this Act. Global corporate social media platforms, such as Facebook (Meta), WhatsApp (Meta), Instagram, Google and YouTube etc have agreed to enforce this legislation, under the guise of protecting children. Other platforms such as X (Twitter) and TikTok are resisting censorship. Elon Musk believes that there is a benefit to open discussion and in giving people a chance to hear both sides in order to form balanced opinions, as well as an opportunity to rebut misinformation. If there is no openness online, we will only be privy to the narratives of the lobbyists with the Government's ear to push their commercial agendas. (Tobacco industries and the pharmaceutical industries are a case in point).
• What kind of country will we end up with when our citizens are censored or banned from having a controversial opinion, one that might disagree with the mainstream narrative?

This special Iconoclast Roundtable, by Ryland Media, addresses the dangers of the new proposed Hate Speech Bill in Ireland. Barrister Una McGurk, Professor Gerard Casey and Sarah Hardiman from Free Speech Ireland spell out the true nature of this controversial piece of legislation and the possible intentions behind it.

Minister for Justice, Helen McEntee, defends the unpopular Hate Speech Bill on the basis of following other countries' lead, as opposed to evaluating it on it's own merits. She has resisted defining the word "hate".

The RTE presenter informs her that Éire is the only country in the EU with standalone common law courts. To fall into line with EU legislation would dilute Éire's constitutional rights - see Article 5 of An Bunreacht. ('Éire is a sovereign, independent, democratic State') It would in effect be surrendering our inalienable rights and relinquishing our nation's sovereign status, which no men or States can impede upon at law.

Senator Craughwell, one of the few senators speaking out against the Hate Speech Bill, warns of the risks of bringing this rushed legislation forward, without full debate.