Amanda Millar, president of the Law Society of Scotland, said the criminal liability in respect of directors and presenters of plays had “presented a significant threat to freedom of expression in the arts”.

She added: “We still have a number of concerns about aspects of the Bill, including the use of archaic language and subjective terms such as ‘insulting’, but recognise that the changes announced today, along with the proposed changes to section 11 on protection of freedom of expression in relation to religion, are considerable moves in the right direction. 

“We are also pleased to see that Baroness Kennedy has been appointed to head a working group exploring options around a potential standalone offence of misogynistic harassment.”

Jamie Gillies, spokesman of the Free to Disagree campaign, said: “Dropping the provision on plays will provide reassurance to the creative community in Scotland which was unfairly singled out. And broadening the free speech provision on religion will ensure that robust debate on religious and non-religious beliefs is less likely to be caught.

“There is, however, some way to go before the concerns around free speech are resolved. There is still no free speech clause on transgender identity - an issue that provokes heated debate in society today. There is no ‘dwelling defence’, protecting speech in the privacy of the family home. And the vague terms ‘hatred’, ‘abuse’ and inflammatory remain undefined.

“Most importantly, the government has still not articulated what kind of speech and behaviour it intends to catch via the stirring up’ offences that isn’t already caught by existing laws. Unless they can answer this basic question, there is no justification for these offences, which risk undermining other, vital liberties.”