Three-quarters of respondents back a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland, an opinion poll has found.
The Millward Brown poll, carried out for the Human Rights Consortium, polled just over 1,000 people over the age of 18 across the North. It found that 75 per cent said they thought it important or very important that rights be enshrined in a Bill.
This figure is up some six points on a poll carried our three years ago. However the research predates criticisms of the proposal for a Bill of Rights specific to Northern Ireland contained in recent editions of the Church of Ireland Gazette.
In an editorial, it has criticised the notion that Northern Ireland needs specific legislative protection of rights and argued that the drive for such a measure could inhibit reconciliation.
The chair of the Human Rights Consortium, an umbrella organisation for some 120 groups across Northern society, said the research showed growing backing for a Bill.
Fiona McCausland said: "The real issue now is for this support to be translated into agreement on a strong Bill of Rights by our political parties and the Bill of Rights Forum." The issue has provoked some strong opposition from unionist representatives, who fear a nationalist political agenda, and from some voices within the Church of Ireland.
Chris Sidoti, chairman of the Bill of Rights Forum, a public body charged with consulting and drawing up proposals on a suitable Bill, replied in the latest edition of the Church of Ireland Gazette to its criticisms that a Bill was unnecessary.
"The editorial presents a confusing mash of attempted distinctions involving human rights, national rights and legal rights and a quite inaccurate portrayal of what a Bill of Rights is and what it can do.
At the heart of the editorial's concerns is the notion that a Bill of Rights must be a foundational document, a constitution, with a status different from that of other laws," Mr Sidoti wrote in a letter to editor Canon Ian Ellis.
He said it made no sense to criticise any proposed Bill as an undermining of the UK constitution "because it can't".
Opposition to a Bill was typified by another correspondent, Tristan Kelso, who argued:
"I believe that a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland, distinct from the rest of the United Kingdom and in line with a future similar exercise in the Republic, is a step closer to a United Ireland.
It is clear that the motivation behind the Belfast Agreement was to move us away from the situation where Northern Ireland is wholly British, to one where identities are centred upon an individual's perception of his or her nationality."
However, backing for a Bill came from trade unionist Peter Bunting, who argued:
"The suggestion that an equalisation of rights across Ireland is the ultimate goal of the process ignores the mandate given by the people in both jurisdictions through both the referendum on Articles 2 and 3 and the Belfast Agreement which, whilst recognising that Northern Ireland will remain part of the UK as long as the majority wishes, also recognises the need for closer cross-Border co-operation."