Investigation: Political violence, harassment, intimidation & threats during Ireland’s 2024 general election campaign

30 November 2024

A joint investigation by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) and Hope and Courage Collective (H&CC) documented 55 incidents encompassing politically motivated violence, threats, harassment, targeting and smears across a spectrum of activity in the five weeks leading up to the Irish General Election on 29 November.

These included 4 incidents of offline violence; 13 incidents related to offline harassment against candidates/canvassers; 7 incidents of targeting and harassment against candidate property; 11 incidents of online harassment against candidates/canvassers; and 20 incidents of online smear campaigns and threatening rhetoric.

The analysis is based on monitoring for such incidents on social media and in online news reports. Acts of violence, harassment or threats made against candidate offices and posters were recorded though general acts of vandalism against posters were not. Online incidents involving explicit threats, harassment and verbal abuse were recorded, as were the prolonged use of threatening rhetoric and smear campaigns against candidates. General criticism or condemnation expressed against candidates or campaigns online was not recorded.

Key Findings

Over the course of this analysis, researchers noted that:

• The nature and scale of violence, harassment and other forms of intimidation during the General Election was markedly different to the local/European elections. In general, there was less on-the-ground targeting and more efforts concentrated online. We expand on some potential reasons for this trend below.
• Explicit racist, misogynistic and anti-Muslim slurs were used in targeted acts of hate and harassment against women and candidates with a migrant background.
• 20 candidates used threatening rhetoric against other elected politicians on online platforms.
• A combined 90% of all incidents featured social media, illustrating the central role that online platforms occupy in the hate, harassment and targeting of candidates.
• X and TikTok were the platforms on which we witnessed most hate and harassment, featuring in 65% of all incidents. Permissive platform policies and unenforced guidelines may have emboldened far-right activists, resulting in them operating with ease on X and TikTok.

Differences with June’s local and European elections

There are multiple explanatory factors as to why this election was markedly different from June’s local and European elections. These should be treated as tentative, and the full explanation is certainly multi-faceted.

For one, the number of candidates in the General Election (685) is lower than for the local elections (2,171). Fewer candidates may mean that there are fewer potential targets, and fewer incidents as a result.

Second, there may be less space in the General Election for far-right narratives to gain a foothold and encourage harmful behaviours. In a healthy and robust democracy, especially in a general election where the threshold for getting elected is higher, candidates must set out their stall and appeal to the issues that voters care about, not all of which open space for far-right talking points or criticism of minorities.

Third, there may be incentives for those on the far right not to engage in adverse behavior in the context of the General Election. Violent and intimidatory behaviour streamed on social media appeals only to a small fringe base but does not necessarily mobilise or persuade the wider electorate. Having to appeal to a broader range of voters to win a seat in a general election campaign may have had a moderating effect on some candidates and far-right agitators.

Fourth, there appears to be an increased element of online activity in the incidents recorded. In our analysis of June’s elections, we noted that 69% of incidents included some element of online activity. In this General Election analysis, that figure has risen to 89%. It should be noted that we cannot account for all incidents, as it is possible that harassment, intimidation and other forms of targeting against candidates or canvassers may be taking place on inaccessible platforms like WhatsApp.

Fifth and finally, communities and campaigns may have been more prepared to deal with adverse behaviour in the General Election. Researchers have received reports from canvassers about campaign and community preparedness against far-right threats. It is entirely possible efforts from local and national groups to mitigate such threats have also resulted in incidents of a different nature and scale. It is evident that political parties, independent candidates and community groups have developed protocols around safety and managing risk. Such efforts include training programs for canvassers ahead of the campaign; candidate resources and trainings run by Women for Election; and guides like the Information Pack with online safety advice for all candidates, launched by An Garda Síochána and Coimisiún na Meán ahead of the election.

Despite these efforts, researchers still identified 55 incidents during this analysis. This report includes an analysis of the incidents and categories documented followed by an analysis of trends recorded in the data.

Incident analysis

Offline violence

Researchers documented 4 incidents in this category. In early November Roderic O’Gorman, Green Party leader, was assaulted while out canvassing. The suspect later pleaded guilty to the offence. A week later, it was reported that Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, Labour Party MEP, had coffee thrown at him while he was canvassing in Dublin.

On 24 November, according to the Irish Times, Philip Dwyer, an independent candidate with a long history of promoting the Great Replacement theory and other far-right beliefs, was accused of assault. It is alleged Dwyer assaulted the father of a People Before Profit (PBP) candidate in Bray, Wicklow, whilst brandishing a baton. As reported by the Irish Times, Dwyer later claimed he was assaulted. In the final week of the campaign, Hope & Courage Collective received reports that a person allegedly threatened Social Democrat canvassers with a brick during an incident in Cork. This claim has not been reported in media and is at present unsubstantiated.

Offline harassment, intimidation and/or verbal abuse of candidates/canvassers

Researchers documented 13 incidents in this category, which primarily captured instances of harassment, intimidation and/or verbal abuse targeted at candidates and canvassers, typically while they were out canvassing. ISD has archived all content of these incident but has chosen not to link to them in this report. Some examples include:

• In Donegal, videos uploaded on TikTok on 23 November showed a man filming himself verbally abusing Pearse Doherty (Sinn Féin) and his canvassers, as he followed them around Lifford. In both videos, he shouted obscenities repeatedly, before directing more extreme slurs at Doherty.
• In Offaly, a far-right activist confronted Helen McEntee (Fine Gael) who was canvassing in the town in 15 November. Whilst filming the encounter, the man harassed McEntee over hate speech legislation and crime rates before making accusations regarding McEntee’s husband’s role in the pharmaceutical industry.
• On Dublin’s Rosie Hackett Bridge, Paul Murphy (People Before Profit) was targeted while filming a campaign video on 27 November and berated over the gender of his (non-binary) child.
• In Louth, a video shared online on 23 November showed John McGahon (Fine Gael) being confronted while sitting in his car. In the footage, a man filmed himself approaching McGahon and verbally abusing him with various obscene terms before McGahon drove away.
• Canvassers were also targeted. In separate incidents, teams of canvassers for Aisling Dempsey (Fianna Fail) in Meath and the Social Democrats in Wicklow were harassed and verbally abused by figures who filmed their interactions to share on social media.

Offline targeting and harassment against candidate property

Researchers documented 7 incidents in this category, which primarily captured damage to candidates’ constituency offices and harassment expressed against candidates via their posters. Some examples include:

• In Waterford and Dublin, the constituency offices for Mary Butler (Fine Gael) and Mary Lou McDonald (Sinn Féin) were defaced with graffiti.
• In East Wall, Dublin, a poster belonging to McDonald was set on fire and the footage was posted on X media on 10 November, while a poster belonging to Paul Fitzsimons, the Irish Freedom Party’s candidate in Dublin Bay North, was also set on fire and livestreamed on Facebook on 8 November.

In Clondalkin, Dublin, a far-right activist filmed himself in three separate videos in mid-November using misogynistic slurs against posters of female candidates. While passing posters for Fine Gael’s Mary Seery Kearney, Fianna Fail’s Catherine Ardagh, and PBP’s Hazel De Nortúin, the man repeatedly referred to the women with various misogynistic slurs. In one of the videos, he also spat at a poster of Micheál Martin and referred to him with a homophobic slur.

Online threats, harassment and hate directed towards  candidates/canvassers

Researchers documented 11 incidents in this category, which primarily captured harassment, intimidation and expressions of hate shared online in relation to a candidate or canvasser. Some examples include:

• On TikTok, Monica Peres Oikeh, the Green Party’s Cork South-Central candidate, published a video highlighting how she was targeted by “racist trolls” on the platform. ISD identified slurs and hate speech in the comment sections of three additional videos she published after highlighting this racist abuse.
• On X and TikTok, Umar Al-Qadri, an independent candidate running in Dublin West, was targeted with anti-Muslim slurs. On X, a post by one prominent account who referred to Al-Qadri as a “hate preacher” was viewed over 45,000 times, while a video on TikTok targeting the candidate received over 23,000 views.
• On TikTok, Michelle Keane, an independent candidate running in Kerry, targeted a local primary school teacher. Keane named her, used misogynistic remarks in describing her and claimed she was canvassing for Norma Foley, which, Keane alleged, was a “breach of professional conduct for teachers.” Keane went on to claim the teacher supports “woke ideology nonsense … child abuse.”

On X, when a Polish citizen shared her experience about canvassing for a Green Party candidate in Dublin, she was harassed on the platform, accused of “subverting” democracy in Ireland and engaging in “election interference.”

Online smear campaigns and hostile rhetoric

Researchers documented 20 incidents in this category, which primarily captured hostile language expressed by candidates against other elected politicians, and smear campaigns initiated against candidates.

In total, ISD identified 20 candidates (or 3% of all candidates) running in the General Election who used the term “traitor” in online posts that referenced leading government politicians, opposition figures and President Michael D. Higgins since campaigning began on 8 November.

These incidents are included, as “traitor” is a term commonly used in far-right discourse to delegitimise and target political opponents by framing them as enemies of the nation. As academic Cas Mudde explains in his book, The Far Right Today, the use of “traitor” is strategic to reinforce the far right’s populist framework that places themselves on the side of the people against an imagined ‘corrupt elite.’

In a post on X, a far-right candidate in Dublin posted a photo of Micheál Martin and wrote he “is the most dangerous traitor politician of all,” claiming he wished to create a Gestapo. In a post on TikTok, published by a candidate running for the Irish People in Cork, they directed a message at Martin and said, “your time is up, traitor,” before adding #dictator to their post. Mary Lou McDonald, Darragh O’Brien and Lynn Boylan were also targeted.

Data analysis

Aside from the themes of targeting, the data collected by ISD and H&CC also reveals other trends in who was targeted and where they were targeted.

Who was targeted?

A record number of 247 women candidates registered to stand in the 30 November  General Election, according to campaign group Women for Election. Of the 55 incidents reviewed during this analysis, 17 targeted females, 22 targeted men and 14 were judged to target both. Of those 17 incidents, women were targeted with racial and misogynistic slurs in 7 instances.

Compared to June’s local elections where a record number of candidates of a migrant background ran, not as many ran in the General Election. As a result, there was also less targeting of such candidates. However, some notable exceptions remain, such as the online harassment directed towards Umar Al-Qadri and Monica Peres Oikeh.

After June’s local and European elections, ISD and H&CC noted that there was a disproportionate targeting of women candidates and candidates with migrant backgrounds. It is positive to see this has decreased.

The leaders of the main parties were also targeted. Of the 54 incidents, a total of 12 targeted specific politicians: Micheál Martin (5); Mary Lou McDonald (4), Roderic O’Gorman (2) and Simon Harris (1).

Where were people targeted?

Of the 55 incidents:

• Six (or 11%) occurred entirely offline. These included the assaults of Roderic O’Gorman and Aodhán Ó Ríordáin.
• 30 (or 55%) occurred entirely online. These included instances of harassment, falsehoods, racist abuse and hostile rhetoric, such as candidates who referenced other elected figures as “traitors.” Also included here was an explicit rant posted on Telegram that accused Helen McEntee of staffing the Department of Justice with sexual predators and shared other accusations about her husband.

19 (35%) included an online and offline element. These included videos of candidates or canvassers being the subject of harassment or verbal abuse while out on canvassing. The personal abuse aimed at Paul Murphy on 27 November and later shared on X and TikTok is one example. Videos that record the targeting of constituency offices and posters were also popular.

This overlap of online and offline dynamics was noted in our June analysis. A tactic popular among those who harass politicians, candidates or canvassers offline is to film their interactions and share them online. These videos are enormously popular on social media and constantly garner international attention, generating further cycles of abuse for those involved.

Of the 55 incidents recorded, a collective 90% featured social media in some form. This illustrates the central role online platforms play in facilitating, incentivising or enabling political violence, harassment, intimidation and hostile rhetoric of all shades.

Of the 25 incidents documented that featured some element of offline activity, 15 (or 60%) happened to candidates/canvassers while they were out canvassing.

Regarding social media platforms, X and TikTok were the online spaces where most hate and harassment incidents that we witnessed occurred.  Of the 55 incidents, a collective 36 (or 65%) occurred on X and TikTok. Ineffective enforcement of community guidelines seems to be emboldening far-right content creators and users on these platforms. The full breakdown was X (22 incidents); TikTok (14); Facebook (6); YouTube (4); Telegram (2); and no platforms (7).

Conclusion

Although there have been serious incidents of political violence and harassment during the General Election campaign, it has not met the scale or extremity we had anticipated after the local elections earlier this year.

Several converging factors have likely contributed to this: the need for broad appeal in a General Election, the numbers of candidates running, the lessons learned from the local and European elections, and strategies implemented by those seeking election. In addition, canvassers have had time to strategise and build resilience to far-right intimidation since their experience of the local and European elections. It is also evident political parties, independent candidates and community groups have developed protocols around safety and managing risk.

This isn’t to say that we should not take political violence and harassment seriously. While any incident of political violence or harassment poses a potential threat to democracy, it is also important to note that the intended goals of the violence is often to silence and intimidate people from expressing their democratic rights or running in the election have not been successful.

That said, it is extremely worrying that 90% of all incidents featured on social media in some form. This raises some serious and ongoing questions about social media platforms’ enforcement of community guidelines and standards, and compliance with the Digital Services Act. The DSA includes obligations for these companies regarding the protection of civic discourse, electoral processes, and their users’ fundamental rights, particularly in the time around any member state’s elections.

The effects of sustained and repeated harassment cannot be understated and require a robust response from social media platforms, An Gardai Siochana and the regulators, along with a commitment in the new programme for government to address any gaps in law to tackle this. It also requires these actors to direct additional resources towards moderation and reporting of content that is hateful, discriminatory, or violent in nature.