NI Secretary was presented with options to make Troubles legacy bill 'human rights compliant': UHRW
The government repeatedly ignored suggested improvements to the new Troubles legacy legislation which would have made it more “human rights compliant,” a victims’ advocacy organisation has claimed.
Following NI Secretary Chris Heaton-Harris’s assertion that there were “no alternatives” put forward, the Ulster Human Rights Watch (UHRW) group has spoken out – saying it put forward several proposed amendments and recommendations to the NI Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill that were cast aside.
The bill completed its final passage through Westminster on Tuesday and is expected to become law within days.
The Lords had repeatedly pressed government ministers to rethink plans to offer a limited form of immunity to the perpetrators of crimes committed during the Troubles, aimed at encouraging them to share information with a truth recovery body.
The Bill, which would establish an Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery, would also prevent future civil cases and inquests into offences committed during the 30 years of conflict.
UHRW advocacy manager, Axel Schmidt, said that UHRW committed to taking part in all public consultations on the legacy proposals since 2017.
“On each occasion our organisation submitted proposals for an alternative,” he said.
"In 2018, UHRW opposed the Stormont House Agreement proposals and submitted detailed proposals for an alternative. These proposals were based on fundamental principles and a definition of victim of crime that were in compliance with Northern Ireland legislation and the European Convention on Human Rights.
“It is the sad reality that despite all the representations made, the UK Government has chosen not to take into account balanced proposals that were human rights compliant.”
Mr Schmidt said: “Since September 2022, when dealing with [the bill], UHRW has submitted 13 proposed amendments and 2 recommendations in order to make the legislation human rights compliant. Some of these proposals may have influenced minor amendments that were introduced in the House of Lords. However, the Secretary of State has not upheld them in the Commons.”
Mr Schmidt added: “It is therefore not accurate for the Secretary of State to say that no-one presented him with an alternative. There was an alternative, which was to support legislation that upheld human rights in a democratic society, while opposing terrorism and preventing the history of the Troubles from being re-written”.