Building a Human Rights Culture in a Political Democracy: The role of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission
by Colin Harvey
This section of the Agreement structures the debate. What is notable is the mixture of consociational and other elements in this passage. Rather than follow the language of a new beginning or a fresh start, thus permitting the Human Rights Commission to take a dynamic approach, the participants have come up with a formulation which enables and limits. On the enabling side it is evident that the passage provides for a instrument which goes beyond the European Convention. The Convention is recognised to be weak in several areas, on a right to equality for example. It is also primarily confined to civil and political rights. The section also enables the Commission to take account of international instruments and experience.
Arguments have been made for and against an expansive approach to this exercise. Those wishing to see the best possible Bill of Rights are hampered by the limiting language of the Agreement. However, the language of the Agreement is not as limiting as might be thought. This section must be read as part of the overall stress on a new beginning and a fresh start and the importance of the vindication of the human rights of all. It would scarcely accord with the new beginning if a narrow approach was adopted here. There is an additional problem. The voluminous literature on Northern Ireland has not provided us with a consensus position on the "particular circumstances of Northern Ireland". It is precisely this "context" which is contested. To focus on this phrase, and give it undue weight, may result in an unproductive and divisive debate. Given this, the issue should be which rights a modern Bill of Rights must contain, given current developments and international experience. This raises its own problems, in particular, the rights to be included and the institutions mechanism of enforcement. For example, it has been suggested that a new constitutional court might be necessary given the particular circumstances of Northern Ireland.12 This raises old and familiar questions about the role of the judges and human rights enforcement in a political democracy.
The Commission launched the Bill of Rights exercise on 1 March 2000 and it has placed great weight on the process. The belief is that an open and transparent process, which includes as many people as possible, will secure the legitimacy of any instrument that is drafted. In its work the Commission can drawn upon the knowledge and experience of existing social movements in Northern Ireland as well as comparative experience of other countries. It has made clear that it wants to achieve the best possible Bill of Rights within the context of the Agreement. It may be impeded in this by those who want to see this exercise rigidly defined and restrictively implemented. The Agreement is not without its ambiguities and there is scope for a narrow and restrictive approach to be taken. As I have suggested, this would, however, conflict with the spirit of the Agreement which is firm in its commitment to a new beginning and the protection and the vindication of the human rights of all. The Human Rights Commission has sought to make the process an inclusive one. In order to draw upon existing expertise it established working groups in the areas of: social and economic rights; children and young people; criminal justice; cultural rights and community identity; language; victims' rights; equality; education; and implementation.13 The working groups were tasked with making recommendations to the Commission on the rights that might be included in its draft Bill of Rights. The Commission has also produced a training manual as part of its Bill of Rights exercise.
The process of drafting a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland will be instructive.
After years when Northern Ireland was known mainly for the bad aspects of
human rights abuse it may now attempt to lead the way in the UK on human
rights protection. There are difficult issues of principle and practice
to be addressed. As I argue, the Commission has an important role in enriching
political democracy. The issue now is to what extent a Bill of Rights can
make a real contribution in this regard also. |
