Paul Bradford
Question:7 Mr. Bradford asked the Minister for Justice if she favours incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic Irish law by means of a constitutional amendment or otherwise.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - European Convention on Human Rights.
Liam Burke
Question:13 Mr. L. Burke asked the Minister for Justice if she favours incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic Irish law by means of a constitutional amendment or otherwise.
John Browne
Question:23 Mr. Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny) asked the Minister for Justice if she favours incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic Irish law by means of a constitutional amendment or otherwise.
Paul Connaughton
Question:28 Mr. Connaughton asked the Minister for Justice if she favours incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic Irish law by means of a constitutional amendment or otherwise.
Seymour Crawford
Question:56 Mr. Crawford asked the Minister for Justice if she favours incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic Irish law by means of a constitutional amendment or otherwise.
Enda Kenny
Question:58 Mr. E. Kenny asked the Minister for Justice if she favours incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic Irish law by means of a constitutional amendment or otherwise.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7, 13, 23, 28, 56 and 58 together.
Ireland is a party to two international instruments on human rights, the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The approach of successive Governments to both of these international instruments has been to carry out a detailed assessment of their obligations, both before ratification and in response to subsequent interpretations of the instruments, to see whether these are already provided for in Irish law or whether additional legislation is needed. The alternative approach suggested, that of direct incorporation of the European Convention into Irish law, raises a number of questions which would have to be answered before such a proposal could be given further consideration.
Many of the rights contained in the Convention and the Covenant are either explicitly contained in our Constitution or have been identfied by our courts as being among those rights not expressly enumerated by the Constitution, but implicit in its provisions. In the light of this, it would be difficult to incorporate into our laws, whether by means of a constitutional amendment or legislation, new provisions which duplicate many of those already in the Constitution. Who would interpret those provisions, our Supreme Court, the European Court of Human Rights or the United Nations' Human Rights Committee? What would happen if the provisions conflicted with each other? What would happen to our constitutional jurisprudence built up over so many years? Until there are convincing answers to these and other questions, I do not believe that the principle of direct incorporation in the Constitution can sensibly be said to be the best way forward.
I raise these points by way of a realistic assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the various possibilities put forward. The important point, surely, is that the Government is fully committed, as it has shown, to full compliance with its international obligations and the House can be assured that, whatever legal means are chosen to achieve this, that principle will not change.
I asked if the Minister is in favour of incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic law by means of "a constitutional amendment or otherwise". Is she aware that Article 14 of the Declaration of Human Rights states that everybody has the right——
I dissuade the Deputy from quoting.
I am not quoting, Sir, I am stating what is in that Article. It states that everybody has the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. Does the Minister agree that, notwithstanding her review of the entire Convention, that our record on political asylum is abysmal and is a total failure in terms of meeting our obligations to those seeking asylum? While we are awaiting the outcome of the Minister's review will she provide in law that asylum seekers be given sympathetic consideration when they arrive on our shores?
On assuming my duties as Minister for Justice, I first examined the aliens division as there were a number of difficulties in this area. As a result of that examination, the Government established an inter-department committee, representing the Government Departments which had an interest in this area, including the Department of Enterprise and Employment, as it would have to look at it from the point of view of work permits, the Department of Foreign Affairs because our consulates and embassies abroad are dealing with this problem on day-to-day basis and the Department of Justice. Various recommendations were made and a Bill to deal with this matter is in the course of preparation in my Department. The Deputy will be very pleased when he sees the results of the wide-ranging consultation that has taken place. The interdepartmental committee did not work on its own, it invited all the organisations who had expressed concern in the past about the difficulties of asylum seekers to visit it. The positive recommendations it made were taken on board and will be implemented into law.
The Minister pointed out the difficulties associated with this proposal. Will she look at the merit of the proposal? I suggest that one possible useful approach might be if we were prepared to incorporate the European Convention into domestic law and make the case that such an approach should be adopted on an island-wide basis. In the context of our discussions on Northern Ireland we would then be in a position to suggest that the Convention should be adopted into Northern Ireland's domestic law.
We are having an extension of the question.
Having regard to the problems involved in dealing with this matter, by way of amendment or by way of legislation, and incorporating the various recommendations of the Convention directly into law, I will certainly look at Deputy O'Keeffe's suggestion.
I accept, as the Minister stated, that there would be a difficulty if there were two separate elements of jurisprudence on the same text. Will she agree that there is something objectionable about our present system when, for example, our Constitution contains three separate references to the death penalty and I understand we are about to sign a Protocol to the European Convention on Human Right outlawing the death penalty? Is it not time we brought out constitutional provisions, as this question suggests, into line with what we consider acceptable human rights' standards internationally and at home?
It is always desirable to have the best possible provisions in our Constitution. As the Deputy is aware, we are committed to acceptable standards of human rights. He must accept — and I believe he does — that the advice available to me is that there are difficulties in relation to jurisprudence which have developed over the years in regard to what is contained in the Constitution. We must ensure, whatever road we take in incorporating the Convention into domestic law, whether it is by way of legislation or amendment, that we do not do something counter to that already contained in our Constitution or superfluous to what is already provided for in our laws.
Does the Minister propose to examine the question of asylum seekers separate from the Convention of Human Rights? Will she indicate when she proposes to bring that legislation before the House? Will she indicate also when she proposes to deal with the declaration on human rights?
In regard to the second question, I cannot give the Deputy a definite commitment in respect of a timescale. Legislation on asylum seekers will be dealt with separately and is being drafted in my Department at present. I had hoped to be in a position to publish it this session, but I would not like to be tied to that. Nevertheless, the legislation is not being delayed. I realise many Deputies and people outside this House have raised questions in regard to the treatment of asylum seekers and I am determined to clarify the matter once and for all.
Surely the Minister must be aware that several interdepartmental committees have examined the matter of asylum seekers. The former Minister for Justice, Deputy Burke, was involved in a full examination of the matter as one of the presidents of the European Council when Ireland held the EC Presidency. Surely there should be no further delay in implementing some of the promises the Minister made in this House when we debated the Bill introduced by Deputy Shatter.
There is no delay in that regard, but I felt it was important that everybody involved in asylum should have their say in any proposals introduced by the Government. For that reason I involved people from the Departments of Foreign Affairs and Enterprise and Employment. I also felt it important that the interdepartmental committee should not only have access to Government Departments or State agencies, but would also have the benefit of the knowledge, wisdom and recommendations of the various voluntary agencies whose representatives, like Deputy Carey, have expressed concern in regard to our asylum laws. For that reason the committee met a wide range of groups who are interested in this matter. As far as the officials of my Department and I are concerned, there will be no delay in introducing the legislation and the benefit of the interdepartmental group meeting and the recommendations made by the various groups will be evident then.