Unionists should catch up with others and start using human rights language more, MPs are told

That is the view from Alyson Kilpatrick, chief commissioner at the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC), who was giving evidence to Parliament’s NI Affairs Committee about the government’s plans to scuttle the 1998 Human Rights Act.

Ms Kilpatrick also told MPs that the PSNI top brass are opposed to any attempts to alter, let alone repeal, the Human Rights Act.

The Tory government is currently pushing a draft law called ‘The Bill of Rights Bill’ through parliament.

In its own words, the bill will “reform the law relating to human rights by repealing and replacing” the Human Rights Act.

– WHAT DOES THE 1998 ACT ACTUALLY DO? –

The Tories have long complained about the Human Rights Act, which essentially weaves the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law.

For example, during a previous effort to repeal the act, Tory MP Charlie Elphicke said “human rights matter, but they are in crisis today, with a substantial majority of the British people regarding human rights as a charter for criminals and the undeserving”.

The articles of the European Convention – particularly Article 2* – have often been invoked in the Belfast courts as a way of re-igniting police investigations into old killings, such as that of Pat Finucane.

These convention rights were also recently used to successfully challenge the Counter Terrorism and Sentencing Act 2021, a law which said convicts had to serve two-thirds of their sentence, not half, before being eligible for release on licence (in that particular case, the applicants were four men jailed after a Continuity IRA bugging operation).

Quizzed about her position on repealing the Human Rights Act, Ms Kilpatrick said the act has been used by the NIHRC to launch legal cases aimed at liberalising abortion laws, and allowing gay couples to adopt.

But these cases “could not have happened” if the Human Rights Act didn’t exist, she said.

She went on to say that, far from being against the Human Rights Act, the public are concerned “how limited the Human Rights Act is” and how “basic the rights are”.

However, she also said that perceptions of the act have been tarnished by “quite an aggressive and successful campaign by media and others… so it takes so much more to educate out of that sort of mindset”.

At one stage she described the act as “very special – magical almost” in the way it applies the European Convention.

– ‘PSNI DOES NOT WANT THIS SCRAPPED’ –

Asked by SDLP MP Claire Hanna if there are “particular implications for access for justice in relation to the conflict with this bill”, she replied:

“Yes... there are clearly access to justice issues, because it specifically it intends to limit access.

"Now, the reason for that is that it's believed too many people have accessed and abused the rights of access they've had.

"I don't accept that necessarily. I don't say there couldn't be a case like that where someone tries to use the system. But courts are pretty good at getting rid of those cases as it is.

"A positive obligation under Article 2, which requires independent investigations... that will be affected directly by this.”

Quizzed by Alliance’s Stephen Farry about the effect on policing, Ms Kilpatrick said: “Every senior police officer that I spoke to said the Human Rights Act had – once they got their head around it – created a clear pathway for them to make decisions, the difficult decisions.

"None of them wants to see the Human Rights Act amended, let alone repealed… they've built up everything they do from their training, their policy, their operational practice, their briefings, their relationship with the community, on the Human Rights Act.”

She said “don't take my word for it – ask any senior police officer,” adding that the PSNI rank-and-file are “rightly proud of” the Human Rights Act too.

– ‘UNIONISTS NEED TO USE THIS LANGUAGE TOO’ –

DUP MP Carla Lockhart put it to Ms Kilpatrick that “the unionist community often feel their rights aren't as well maybe legislated for” as other groups.

Ms Kilpatrick said she was aware of the sentiment, saying some unionists feel that, when it comes to human rights law, “there's nothing in it for them”.

She added: “[That] is the way it's put to me sometimes – it seems to be they're confined to people who fall into a certain category.

"And there is some truth to the fact that more cases have been taken by those people, because they've used the language of rights, they've been more familiar with it.

"I think the shortfall actually is the unionist community needs to start using the language of rights more itself.”

She also said that “we're trying to really reach out and engage... to put on the record, I'd very much like to invite any people who feel human rights haven't applied to them to come to the commission and tell us that, and tell us why”.

*Article 2 of the European Convention, written into UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998, says everyone’s life must be protected by law, and that states have an “obligation to carry out an effective investigation into alleged breaches” of this right.

More from this reporter on the Human Rights Commission:

1 – Public body declares that in spite of Brexit Northern Ireland must ape the EU’s laws on human rights – or it will launch court fights

2 – WATCH: Differing opinions on ‘transphobia’ and ‘conversion therapy’ are ‘problematic’ says human rights chief Alyson Kilpatrick

3 – Human rights public bodies argue Good Friday Agreement 'intended long-term North-South equivalence' in terms of law