In the week in which Scottish football was marred by an incident involving pyrotechnics at the St Mirren vs Celtic match, pressure is mounting on governing bodies to put fans in the dock by adopting the practice of strict liability.


The call to crackdown on clubs in the face of racism, homophobia and violence has previously been posited by the SNP's James Dornan. Now the Glasgow Cathcart MSP has plans to unveil a revised Member's Bill to bring in the legislation in the wake of a number of incidents at Scottish football grounds since the start of the year. 


What is strict liability?


In civil and criminal legal terms, a person or company is liable when they are financially or legally responsible for something. Usually, proving liability is predicated on recognising negligence or an intent to harm. When it comes to strict liability, there is no legal requirement to prove fault or criminal intent.


In football, strict liability is when a club is held accountable for the negative actions of its fans at a match, rather than an individual supporter. 

READ MORE: MSP James Dornan renews calls for strict liability


It is a standard currently upheld by UEFA for tackling offensive behaviours using a system of sanctions which can include docking of league points, forfeiting of matches, withdrawal of licences, a ban from selling tickets to supporters and the closure of sections of grounds. In the last ten years a number of Scottish clubs have been disciplined under the scheme due after fans misbehaved at European matches.


In 2014, the English FA introduced the rule after campaigners and MPs applied pressure following a parade of racist, homophobic and anti-Semitic incidents that blighted the beautiful game.


Why is strict liability needed?


Verbal abuse of players, pitch invaders, or missiles in the form of bottles and coins being hurled into play are no longer isolated incidents, with reports of such behaviour occurring almost weekly.  While strict sanctions would be harsh punishment for the majority of fans who don't endanger themselves or others, it is one way to weed out the troublemakers, argue supporters. 


League and League Cup games are regulated by the Scottish Professional Football League (SPFL), with the Scottish Football Association responsible for the Scottish Cup and for the game as a whole, but neither operate a strict liability policy.


When incidents of violence and bigotry occur, the league investigates and apply action in accordance with their rules. To introduce new legislation, change would have to come from the clubs and research carried out by BBC Scotland showed that only three of the 42 senior SPFL clubs are in favour of adopting strict liability to curb fan's misbehaviour.  

But the question still remains if it is indeed the silver bullet that some suggest.


What are people saying?


Minister for Public Health, Sport and Wellbeing, Joe FitzPatrick warned the Scottish FA and SPFL that support for strict liability was growing in Holyrood. The issue of supporter behaviour was highlighted after sectarian chanting was directed at Kilmarnock bosses and players during matches with Rangers and Celtic in January, and police investigated coin-throwing and discriminatory singing during a match between Hearts and Celtic at Tynecastle in February.  Mr Fitzpatrick believes that strict liability legislation could act as a deterrent after parliament voted to repeal the unpopular Offensive Behaviour at Football Act.  He said: “What we’ve got to do [...] is to work with the football authorities to make sure the environment is not permissive of that behaviour."


John Hartson, former Celtic striker, wrote in the Evening Times that offensive behaviour "cannot possibly be allowed to go unchecked" an that he "fully expected" strict liability to be introduced "sooner rather than later". arguing that only clubs can "carry the can for any idiots that are within their support."

READ MORE: Experts ask Scottish football: ‘If not ‘strict liability, then what?’


Dr Niall Hamilton-Smith has questioned if strict liability would be effective without first addressing the reasons behind hooliganism. As a senior lecturer in sociology and criminology at the University of Stirling, Dr Hamilton-Smith believes that better relationships between fans and the police should be fostered - after the damage caused by the controversial Offensive Behaviour at Football Act - and self-policing among supporters encouraged. He said: " Before you can make a club wholly responsible for actions within its stadium, it would be better to work out everyone's roles and responsibilities first and get agreement on that."


James Dornan told The Herald: "It’s time that everybody within Scottish football took responsibility and stepped up to the mark to eradicate Scotlands last 'acceptable taboo'. There is no place for Sectarianism in any corner of Scottish society."


Would it make a difference?


It could, if Dutch football is anything to go by. Politicians and the Dutch FA worked closely to eradicate a history of fan violence with severe fines and have reported a measurable reduction.