|
|
|
FEBRUARY
2006
DECISION TO CONVERT WRIGHT INQUIRY CHALLENGED
Billy Wright’s father, David Wright, was given leave on 17th February to challenge the Secretary of State’s decision to convert the Billy Wright Inquiry to an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005. Leave was given on the following grounds:
· The applicant had a legitimate expectation that the government commitment to accept the recommendations of Judge Cory included an expectation that the form of the inquiry comply with his recommendations.
· Arguably there was a commitment given to Mr. Wright and an intention this inquiry would be compliant with Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Whether the legal structures governing the inquiry allow for this is also arguable.
· Arguably a mistake as to the law has been relied on by the Secretary of State in converting this inquiry. He and the tribunal panel may have misunderstood the scope of the powers of the respective tribunals under the Prison act and under the Inquiries Act.
· Arguably it was procedurally unfair that the chair of the inquiry and the Secretary of State had exchanged correspondence prior to the Inquiry’s public statement on its intention to convert (made by Lord McClean on the 22nd June) but the applicant was not consulted.
This is thus likely to be a very important test case. David Wright has appealed the judge’s refusal to grant him leave on two other points:
· That conversion was a nullity as section 15 of the Inquiries Act (which requires the consent of the person who caused the Inquiry to be held) was not complied with. The applicant argued the present Secretary of State should have obtained the consent of the Paul Murphy, the Secretary who set up the inquiry. Mr Justice Weatherup upheld the constitutional convention that all holders of the post of SOS were the same person.
· That the conversion was irrational. Given the grave concerns expressed by Amnesty International, British Irish RIGHTS WATCH, CAJ, Liberty, the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights and senior judges from three international jurisdictions, including Lord Saville and Judge Cory, that the Inquires Act was fatally flawed, it was unreasonable to hold any inquiry where Article 2 was engaged under this legislation. Mr Justice Weatherup held that in this circumstance the court’s role was in determining the compatibility of legislation with human rights standards and the decision of the Secretary of State to act under legislation lawfully enacted by Parliament could not be irrational.
My thanks to Maggie O’Conor of CAJ for setting out the legal points so clearly.
meanwhile, the finucanes battle on
In the meantime, the government continues to refuse to implement Judge Cory’s recommendation for an independent public inquiry into the murder of Belfast lawyer Patrick Finucane in 1989. On 7th February I attended a meeting between the Finucane family and the Secretary of State, Peter Hain MP. He made it crystal clear that the government’s prime concern is protecting the interests of the security and intelligence services – the very people who stand accused of collusion in the murder – over and above the interests of the family, the public interest, and the interests of justice. The family in their turn made it absolutely plain that they will not participate in an inquiry under the Inquiries Act, which would be under the effective control of the Secretary of State. On 13th February I attended the family’s meeting with Dr Ian Paisley MP, leader of the DUP, the last in a round of meetings with every major political party on the island of Ireland at which the family have been explaining their concerns. The meeting established, as did the meeting last month with the UUP, that there was considerable common ground, and that the Finucane’s case is a matter of justice rather than being a party political issue. Disgracefully, Peter Hain’s follow-up letter to Geraldine Finucane (in which he made not a single concession) was leaked to the media, and one paper was offered a platform piece by Peter Hain, but, as sadly seems to have been the case all along, the Northern Ireland Office underestimated the degree of support the Finucane family enjoys, and the article was not published.
judge cory speaks out
On 22nd February Judge Peter Cory delivered the McDermott Lecture at Queen’s University in Belfast. In a spirited defence of public inquiries based on Canadian experience, the judge said it was better never to hold an inquiry than to leave the public believing there had been a whitewash. He identified four key elements for a successful public inquiry. First, it must be held in public so that the public could see the evidence, hear the witnesses, and be satisfied that the truth had been established. Secondly, it must be timely, so that matters do not fester. Thirdly, any recommendations made must be followed through. Fourthly, the public must be able to trust and rely on the tribunal to act fairly and to get at the truth. When these conditions are met, he argued, public inquiries are a force for good in the world, and there will always be a need for them. Although he did not refer to any of the five inquiries he himself recommended as a result of the invitation from the British and Irish governments to examine collusion cases, he gave several interviews in which he said that the government had moved the goalposts in the Finucane case.
ICCL’S OFFICES DESTROYED BY FIRE
The Irish Council for Civil Liberties has suffered a terrible fire which has destroyed their office. Fortunately, no-one was hurt. BIRW have done what we can to offer practical advice and support, but ICCL face a daunting task of rebuilding their archives and re-establishing their membership records. If you can help, please write to ICCL at their temporary offices: DMG Business Centre, 9 -13 Blackhall Place, Dublin 7, Ireland. Their telephone number remains unchanged at 00 353 1 878 3136.
POLICE BUG SOLICITOR’S CONSULTATIONS
A solicitor in Northern Ireland has been charged with offences related to domestic terrorism. While this is in itself shocking, even more shocking is the fact that the Police Service of Northern Ireland gathered evidence against him by bugging a consultation room at the Serious Crimes Suite in Antrim. Not only does this breach the United Nations’ Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, which says that lawyers’ consultations with their clients must always be private, but it breaches the PSNI’s own code of practice governing its relationship with defence lawyers. Although the PSNI say they followed the rules on covert surveillance, they have failed to understand the damage they have done to their relationship with the legal profession. After years of harassment and intimidation of defence lawyers by police officers, the PSNI had finally been getting its house in order and building bridges with defence lawyers, who play an indispensable role in the criminal justice system. Now lawyers are concerned that client confidentiality may have been breached and that defendants’ right to a fair trial may have been violated. BIRW has voiced our concerns to the Police Ombudsman, the Chief Constable, the Oversight Commissioner, the human rights advisers to the Policing Board, the United Nations, and the Law Society.
CONSUlTATION ON THE DEFINITION OF TERRORISM
Many people may not be aware that Lord Carlile, who keeps counter-terrorism legislation under review, is conducting a consultation exercise on the definition of terrorism – we only found out about it ourselves by accident. We have sent Lord Carlile a submission in which we have argued that there is no need to define terrorism. Acts of terrorism all involve ordinary, if heinous, crimes, such as murder, causing explosions etc, with which the ordinary criminal law and courts are perfectly adequate to deal. Treating terrorism differently punishes perpetrators not for their acts, but for the motivation behind their acts. It creates a twin-track system of justice in which alleged terrorists have fewer rights than other defendants. This only creates miscarriages of justice, martyrs to the cause, and new recruits to extremist organisations.
john dignam
I attended a meting on 22nd February between the family of John Dignam and the PSNI’s Historical Enquiries Team in Lisburn. John Dignam was murdered by the IRA is 1992 and branded as a Special Branch informer, after he made a forced confession of involvement in the murder a year previously of a civil servant, Margaret Perry. However, there is evidence to suggest that at least one of John Dignam’s two associates was working for army intelligence, the Force Research Unit, and that all four murders could have been prevented. The HET is looking into the case as part of their investigation into the activities of the agent known as Stakeknife, who was FRU’s key agent in the IRA internal disciplinary unit known as the nutting squad.
Aire centre/LAW SOCIETY CONFERENCE ON TORTURE
On 1st February I attended a conference organised jointly by the AIRE Centre and the Law Society on the current debate around the use of torture to combat terrorism. An excellent panel of speakers, including fearless lawyers Gareth Peirce and Phil Shiner, discussed attempts to rely on evidence extorted by torture, “extraordinary rendition” (kidnapping suspects and forcibly taking them to third countries where they are tortured), detention without trial, and the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. Participants at the conference very kindly had a whip-round for ICCL which raised £200.
HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS JOINS THE DEBATE
Lousie Arbour, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, gave an incisive lecture at the London School of Economics on 16th February, which both Caroline Parkes and I attended. Her theme was the protection of human rights in an age of uncertainty, and she made a powerful case for ensuring that human rights are not eroded by the legitimate need, and duty upon governments, to protect their people from terrorism. She also argued that the right to life includes not only civil and political rights, but social, cultural and economic rights in the twenty first century. The full text of her speech is available at http://www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/human-rights/Lectures/Louise_Arbour.htm
psni conference on hate crime
Caroline Parkes attended the PSNI’s conference on hate crime on 13th and 14th February in Belfast. The biggest source of hate crime in Northern Ireland, sectarianism, which is responsible for 59% of all crime, was, she felt, rather like the elephant in the room which no-one was mentioning. While the PSNI has made progress in building relationships with ethnic and lesbian/gay/transgender communities, little progress appeared to have been made with those representing communities who were victims of sectarianism. The conference only touched on issues of racism and sectarianism within the PSNI, and BIRW felt it would have been beneficial to explore this further. BIRW is following up on the conference with a letter to the PSNI.
MICHAEL McKEVITT
BIRW has written to the Editor of the Sunday World newspaper concerning a completely untrue story that Michael McKevitt, jailed in the Republic of Ireland for involvement in terrorism on the basis of highly dubious evidence, tried to kill himself on New Year’s Day. Not only is the story the kind of irresponsible journalism that gets the tabloids a bad name, but it was extremely worrying for his family.
POLICE OMBUDSMAN CONSULTS ON MEDIATION PLANS
We have responded to a consultation document produced by the Police Ombudsman on a draft mediation scheme. While we agree with her that it is desirable to resolve complaints by consensus and at as early a stage as possible, we are concerned that some of her suggestions will make her work less transparent and less accountable.
HUMAN RIGHT’S COMMISSION’S STRATEGIC PLAN
BIRW has also commented on the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission’s strategic pan for 2006/9. It is perhaps unfortunate that the need to issue this plan coincides with the appointment of an almost entirely new membership of the Commission, who have hardly got their feet under the table. As a result of this unfortunate coincidence, the strategic plan is rather vague in places and does not convey the strong sense of vision that such a plan requires. We have undertaken to write separately to the Commission about the Bill of Rights, one of its most important tasks.
Equality Commission’s Corporate Plan
BIRW has also made a submission to the Equality Commission in response to their consultation on their Draft Corporate Plan for 2006 to 2009. We have sought to encourage the Equality Commission to play a strong and robust role in developing and enhancing civil society in Northern Ireland. We believe that the creation of community of interests on equality issues can further the rights agenda, and create good practice across institutions and agencies.
Community Restorative Justice Schemes
BIRW responded to the NIO’s Draft Guidelines on Community Restorative Justice (CRJ) schemes. Our submission highlights the consistent failure to adequately address issues such as paramilitary influence over CRJ schemes and the role of ex-offenders. We have concerns about proposals for a referral process, which we feel encourages schemes to operate as community police officers, and undermines confidence in the PSNI. We encouraged the NIO to ensure that schemes developed in nationalist and unionist communities are equal, and that schemes should share experiences. While the guidelines offered a positive first step, BIRW believes there is more work to be done.
AMERICAN PLANS
On 22nd February I had the great pleasure of meeting with Mary Noonan, Chief of Staff to Representative Chris Smith, to brief her on about human rights issues in Northern Ireland, particularly on progress made on policing reforms. I hope to be in Washington for the week of St Patrick’s Day in March to expand on these discussions.
Jane Winter,
Director,
28th February 2006.
For Peace Justice & Human Rights
