Human rights move ‘a threat to peace’
POLITICS: Any dilution to human rights laws in the UK will undermine Northern Ireland’s historic peace agreement, academics have warned.
The Government announced a review of the Human Rights Act and how it is functioning in December, amid long-standing calls from Eurosceptics to significantly redraft or ditch it.
ANY DILUTION to human rights laws in the UK will undermine Northern Ireland’s historic peace agreement, academics have warned, upsetting the delicate constitutional balance achieved in the Good Friday accord.
The Government announced a review of the Human Rights Act (HRA) and how it is functioning in December, amid long-standing calls from Eurosceptics to significantly redraft or ditch it.
Now academics at Queen’s University’s Human Rights Centre have outlined concerns over amending provisions in a submission to the review.
“We consider the current review into the Human Rights Act to be neither welcome nor timely,” said Prof Christopher McCrudden, one of the authors of the Queen’s submission.
“We see no need to diminish in any way the protections that the Human Rights Act currently offers to the people of Northern Ireland.
“Any move that would be widely viewed as undermining the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement and its strong commitment to the advancement and protection of human rights would be highly regrettable.”
Former Court of Appeal judge Sir Peter Gross is leading the independent examination of how the Act is being interpreted in UK courts.
The Queen’s academics state the UK’s continued ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights (EHCR) is a “significant part” of the Good Friday/Belfast agreement. They highlight the accord contains an important section on the protection of human rights and equality.
The submission argues the Act plays an important role in policing in Northern Ireland and in the handling of the legacy of the Troubles.
It notes the human rights and equality provisions of the Agreement are underpinned by an international treaty between Ireland and the UK, adding: “Any significant modification of the HRA in Northern Ireland that leads to a diminution of rights will attract international attention and concern.”
It also warns that the UK’s threat to override elements of the
Brexit Withdrawal Deal through provisions of its Internal Market Bill should serve as a “salutary warning of the potential political fall-out, not least in the United States, to any weakening of the HRA”.
The academics warn that Northern Ireland’s constitutional settlement could be “collateral damage” to a review exercise it claims has “little to do with the realities of human rights practice in Northern Ireland”.
They further highlight that Brexit’s Northern Ireland Protocol is in part designed to protect rights currently afforded, warning this regional specific commitment would further complicate changes on a UK-wide basis. The deal to restore powersharing in Northern Ireland created a special Assembly committee to consider the introduction of a specific Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland.
The academics claim the review of the HRA cuts across the work of the committee which is still ongoing.
They warn of the risk of exacerbating political divisions around rights in Northern Ireland.
“Indeed, the debate in Northern Ireland is currently focused on the potential extension of human rights, rather than their diminution,” the submission adds.
We consider the current review neither welcome nor timely. Prof Christopher McCrudden, Queen’s University.