Hate crime data

Participating States have committed themselves to pass legislation that provides for penalties that take into account the gravity of hate crime, to take action to address under-reporting, and to introduce or further develop capacity-building activities for law enforcement, prosecution and judicial officials to prevent, investigate and prosecute hate crimes. Specifically, states have repeatedly committed themselves to collect, maintain and make public reliable data on hate crimes, across the criminal justice system from the police to the courts. In recent years, participating States have consolidated their commitments on hate crime in recognition of the importance of a comprehensive approach in addressing the many facets of the problem.

Our mandate
Our methodology

SELECT YEAR

BIAS MOTIVATIONS

OVERVIEW OF INCIDENTS

2016 Hate Crime Data

Forty-four participating States have submitted hate crime information to ODIHR, 18 of which provided detailed statistics in accordance with the bias motivations on which ODIHR reports.

The official figures were complemented by contributions from 125 civil society groups, covering 48 participating States. These contributions amount to 5,601 hate incidents, including 3,519 disaggregated statistical incidents on nine States and 2,082 descriptive incidents on 48 States. This information includes incidents provided by the Holy See, the UNHCR and OSCE missions.

The general level of reporting increased slightly for 2016, but limited data on some bias motives, notably anti-Roma and Sinti hate crimes, continue to indicate under-reporting and gaps in recording.

General challenges to reporting hate crimes

Under-reporting remains a key challenge. Many victims do not come forward to report hate crimes. This happens for a number of reasons, ranging from language barriers to mistrust in the authorities or fear of reprisals. ODIHR works closely with civil society to overcome this challenge and promote and assist in strengthening co-operation between civil society and governments.

Finally, it is also difficult to track cases of hate crimes at all stages, from investigation through sentencing, due to different recording procedures across criminal justice systems. For instance, police forces may use different definitions than prosecutors.

Learn more about ODIHR’s capacity-building programmes here.

 

Participating States