Naomi Long's department says it did not concede Jamie Bryson's judicial review on football banning orders
Naomi Long’s justice department says it has not conceded a court case over the legality of football banning orders – after the TUV said that it had by accepting that legal changes were needed.
It relates to a judicial review taken by Jamie Bryson over whether regulations aimed at controlling hooliganism and anti-social behaviour at Northern Ireland football grounds are legal.
He contested that the legislation had not been updated to take account of the changes to the game when the governance of the top flight leagues switched from the Irish Football Association to the Northern Ireland Football League.
Minister Long had previously said the powers were still active – citing a law from the 1950s about the interpretation of legislation.
This week the Department of Justice (DoJ) announced its intent to amend the legislation – prompting claims of a climbdown by Mrs Long’s department.
North Antrim MLA Timothy Gaston welcomed the fact that DoJ had “conceded” the judicial review and “accepted that Schedule 3 of the Justice Act requires amendment”.
He added: “However, this raises serious questions about the Minister’s earlier dismissive approach to the issues that were being highlighted.
“When these concerns were first raised, they were brushed aside. We were told there was no problem. Yet today, the Department has effectively admitted that there was a defect in the law all along. That inevitably leads to the question: why was this not addressed at the outset, rather than forcing the taxpayer to fund a legal defence of a position that has now been abandoned?”
In response, the DoJ has rejected that characterisation. A spokesperson told the News Letter: “The judicial review proceedings have not been conceded. The court has adjourned the Applicant’s application until 17 September. Therefore the case remains live and the Department is unable to comment.”
Speaking after the latest court case, Jamie Bryson said he was “pleased to have forced the DoJ to have to change the law after saying they would not, but… it is necessary that a formal court remedy is granted to mark what I say was the obviously unlawful nature of their previous approach”.
In March, the justice minister told the News Letter that she was “satisfied that the continued operation of the Football Banning Order powers, and associated sports ground offence provisions contained in the 2011 Act, is lawful”.