OPINION:There is general support in the North for a Bill of rights – contrary to anything David Adams might assert, writes MONICA McWILLIAMS.
DAVID ADAMS presented an inaccurate picture (Opinion and Analysis, May 21st) of the process leading up to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission’s advice to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.
First, he asserted that the former chief commissioner of the commission, Prof Brice Dickson, resigned in 2005. Prof Dickson was appointed, like all human rights commissioners, for a fixed term period of office. When his term was completed in 2005, he stood down and new commissioners were appointed.
I am delighted to report that the newly appointed commissioners took up and followed the mandate handed to them by the Belfast Agreement and successfully delivered the final advice on a Bill of rights on December 10th, 2008.
The commission is also very heartened by the support from across the community divide and the community sectors. We are also pleased with the recent response at international level, where a United Nations committee called on the UK government to enact a Bill of rights for Northern Ireland without delay. Both globally and locally, and especially in an economic recession, the UN continues to emphasise to governments the interdependence of all human rights. The commission in its final advice has heeded this important message.
Adams also claims that the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission delegated its work on a Bill of rights to “a subsidiary quango”, making reference to the Forum for a Bill of Rights. The forum was established by the Secretary of State, and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission remained independent from it.
The commission, like everyone else, was pleased to see this model. It brought political parties and civic society representatives together to debate proposals for a Bill of rights for Northern Ireland, a model which has proved useful in many contexts. All of those involved were aware of the contested nature of human rights in Northern Ireland, and although they were divided on many issues, in their final report the political parties and the sectors agreed the need for such a Bill. Their report was one of the many documents that the commission considered before completing its work.
Finally, Adams argues that the commission’s proposals would lead to a deluge of legal cases.
This is a familiar claim often raised but it is without substance. Similar fears were raised when the Human Rights Act was enacted in the UK and such claims were proved wrong. His claim that a number of recommended social and economic rights have been elevated by the commission to become absolute entitlements is also wrong. The commission has proposed these rights and clearly detailed the limitations that ought to be applied.
Those addressing these rights in the drafting of the Irish Constitution undertook a similar task and understood the difficulties in doing so at that time. It would have been extraordinary if any national human rights institution making proposals for a Bill of rights today ignored the right to education and health, welfare and environmental protection.
Among Adams’s many exaggerations, he made reference to proposals for clothing and heating, but these are not in the commission’s advice. It is disappointing to see him being so dismissive at a time when many people need and want clear provision for social and economic rights.
The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission recently presented evidence to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday [Belfast] Agreement and was encouraged by the recognition that a Bill of rights remains an integral part of the implementation of the agreement.
David Adams argues that some parties and individuals would now stand down that part of the agreement, choosing to believe that “ordinary legislation can do the job just as well”. Adams was present when this part of the Belfast Agreement was negotiated and it is clear that he has now changed his mind. He is entitled to do so, but the agreement received the endorsement of the people on this island and was further endorsed by the St Andrews Agreement, where the remit for a Bill of rights remained. In recognition of this, the Human Rights Commission has now delivered its Bill of rights advice, which fully respects the mandate for the process and is worthy of the name.
Every twist and turn by the commission has indeed been reported by the Northern Ireland media, but again David Adams is wrong to suggest that it is largely uncritical. Such criticism could be viewed as a welcome sign of normalisation compared to the contestation, and indeed terrible conflict, that was endured for so long over human rights in Northern Ireland.
We know that while there is general support for the concept of a Bill of rights, a diversity of opinion exists on the content. We have now provided our advice and believe the implementation of our detailed and comprehensive proposals would represent a new beginning for human rights protection in Northern Ireland. This is our chance to remind the world again that Northern Ireland can be a beacon of hope in difficult and challenging times.
We look forward to the UK government’s consultation on the Bill of rights for Northern Ireland, when the people, once again, can have their say.
Monica McWilliams is chief commissioner of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission