JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GOOD FRIDAY AGREEMENT debate -
Thursday, 3 Jul 2008

Human Rights and the Good Friday Agreement: Discussion.

Chairman

It is a great pleasure to welcome everyone here today, in particular somebody who is familiar to all of us from his previous roles as a Member of both Houses of the Oireachtas, namely, Dr. Maurice Manning, president of the Irish Human Rights Commission, IHRC. Dr. Manning is accompanied by Mr. Michael Farrell, a member of the commission, and Ms Kirsten Roberts, its director of research, policy and promotion. I welcome to the visitors Gallery from the IHRC Mr. Eamonn Mac Aodha, chief executive officer, Mr. Gerry Finn and Ms Fidelma Joyce. I also welcome Ms Sarah McGrath from the Department of Foreign Affairs.

We had hoped to discuss North-South co-operation in health infrastructure today. Regrettably, the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Mary Harney, and the Minister of Health for Northern Ireland, Michael McGimpsey, MLA, are unable to attend today's meeting. If members are agreeable, I will reschedule it for as early as possible after the recess in September. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I must also inform members that Ms Monica McWilliams and her delegation from the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission are unable to attend today due to their participation in a conference on an important human rights Bill in Northern Ireland. I understand from the clerk to the committee that Ms McWilliams has requested the organisation come before the committee in the autumn to discuss its role and its work with Dr. Manning and the Irish Human Rights Commission. I am happy to agree to this and I am sure members will also agree. Is that agreed? Agreed.

As we are aware, the Irish Human Rights Commission, with its counterpart, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, was born out of the Good Friday Agreement which celebrates its tenth anniversary this year. It is worth noting another anniversary which occurs on 10 December this year, namely, the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Irish Human Rights Commission's mission is to ensure the human rights of all citizens are fully realised, protected in law, policy and practice. It is to be congratulated on being vocal in ensuring that Irish law and practice in the field of human rights is in line with best international practice. Where it believes human rights are not adequately protected, it speaks out clearly and strongly and actively seeks changes in the law, policy or practice concerned.

A joint committee comprising the commissions North and South has been established as a forum to consider human rights issues on the entire island of Ireland. In line with provisions set out in the agreement, the joint committee established a sub-group to consider a charter of rights for the island of Ireland. Under the agreement, the Government is charged with ensuring at least an equivalent level of protection of human rights as that which pertains in Northern Ireland.

In keeping with obligations under the agreement, on 7 May 1999 Ireland ratified the Council of Europe framework convention on national minorities. In addition, the European Convention on Human Rights was incorporated into Irish law on 1 January 2004. It is a great pleasure to invite Dr. Manning to address the committee.

Dr. Maurice Manning

I thank the Chairman. On behalf of the Irish Human Rights Commission, I would like to state how glad we are to be here on the tenth anniversary of the agreement and how pleased we are that this committee was established. We hope to make further presentations to it in the future.

Today provides us with an important opportunity to recall that a commitment to respect and protect human rights is a core element of the Good Friday Agreement. In signing the Agreement, the parties affirmed their "commitment to the mutual respect, the civil rights and the religious liberties of everyone in the community".

The Irish Government made a commitment to undertake five specific commitments. These were to establish a national human rights commission with a mandate and remit equivalent to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, to ratify the Council of Europe framework convention on national minorities, to implement enhanced employment equality legislation, to introduce equal status legislation and to continue to take further steps to demonstrate its respect for the different traditions in the island of Ireland.

We are happy to state substantial progress has been made in implementing the human rights elements of the Good Friday Agreement. The Irish Human Rights Commission was established under the Human Rights Commission Act 2000, with a statutory mandate to endeavour to ensure that the human rights of all persons in the State are fully realised and protected in the law and practice of the State.

Since its establishment, the commission has strived to carry out its powers as laid down in the Act to the fullest extent possible within the resources available to it. It has consistently and extensively recommended to Government how human rights standards can be reflected in Irish legislation. It has appeared before various committees of the Houses to explain to members what we mean by adhering to the highest international standards.

The commission has appeared before the High Court and Supreme Court as amicus curiae or friend of the court in cases concerning human rights issues and it is active in promoting awareness and understanding of human rights and the role of the commission through the media, conferences, research and educational initiatives. The commission was elected to the presidency of the national human rights institutions of Europe within three or four years of its establishment.

Also in line with the Government's commitments under the Agreement, an enhanced Employment Equality Act and Equal Status Act have been enacted and, in May 1999, the Irish Government ratified the Council of Europe framework convention on national minorities. Furthermore, the European Convention of Human Rights Act 2003 gave indirect legal effect to the European Convention on Human Rights, giving greater protection to civil and political rights.

The Good Friday Agreement laid down not only a mandate for the founding of the two human rights commissions, but also the modalities to ensure that strong co-operation was institutionalised between them. The Agreement specifically envisaged the establishment of a joint committee comprising representatives of the two human rights commissions as a forum for considering human rights issues on the island of Ireland, and the legislation under which each commission was established created a statutory basis for this joint committee.

We particularly welcome this opportunity to inform members of the progress of the joint committee. The first official meeting took place in November 2001 and, since then, the committee has met on a regular basis. The joint committee provides an opportunity for both commissions to co-operate in pursuit of commonly agreed objectives. Since its inception, the work and role of the joint committee has grown in strength.

The work of the committee is characterised by very positive relations between the two bodies. It is through a spirit of friendship, co-operation and trust the two commissions work well together. We have not had a single difficulty between us. It is important to make clear the environment within which it operates is so positive.

We meet on a regular basis and through a number of sub-committees and informal meetings. Last week, we attended in Glasgow the opening of the new Scottish human rights commission which is coming into being, with a new human rights commission for England and Wales. We have made informal arrangements to enable the commissions in the four jurisdictions to meet on a regular basis. There will, therefore, be not just a North-South dimension, but also an east-west dimension to the work we are doing.

We have recently appointed a dedicated policy support officer to work specifically with the joint committee to ensure our work does not fall between the cracks of the two commissions. There will be a specific dedicated person in place to ensure the common policies on which we are working will have the proper infrastructure and support to make them happen.

My colleague, Mr. Farrell, will speak to the joint committee about some particular areas of our work. I would like to give just one example to highlight the co-operation received in relation to the Omagh support and self-help group. The chief commissioner, Ms Monica McWilliams, and I met the group on a number of occasions to outline our joint response to its call for support for a cross-Border inquiry into the Omagh bombings of 15 August 1998. The two commissions have publicly called on the British and Irish Governments to establish a review of the Omagh bombings and surrounding events, involving the appointment of a serving or retired judge of international standing to examine all available material to determine whether it is appropriate to institute an independent, cross-Border public inquiry into the atrocity.

As well as through the formal structure of a joint committee, the two commissions have the opportunity to meet regularly in other contexts, particularly at meetings of the European group. In fact, we have been working very well with the Northern commission through the United Nations, the OSCE and the Council of Europe in helping to establish new human rights commissions in eastern and central Europe or to work with commissions which are vulnerable or under-resourced. We have been able to put our expertise at the disposal of these various international bodies. In addition, through Irish Aid which has a strong focus on good governance, the commission has been working with the authorities in Lesotho to establish a human rights commission there and we have invited the Northern commission to share in that work with us, which it has happily agreed to do.

The Irish Human Rights Commission and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission are fully accredited national human rights institutions and both have United Nations "A" status. This gives them a very strong standing within the community of national human rights institutions. They are committed to working together on human rights issues which affect people throughout the island of Ireland. However, implementation of this aspect of the Good Friday Agreement can only be ensured if both commissions are properly resourced and their work supported. I, therefore, encourage the members of the Oireachtas joint committee to ensure there is a continued commitment to the work of the two commissions and that this year, on the tenth anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement, there is a renewed commitment to strengthening the two commissions, jointly and individually, representing as they do an important element of good practice in this regard.

It is our desire that the Irish Human Rights Commission be answerable directly to the Houses of the Oireachtas. It is inappropriate that we should have as our sponsoring Department, a Department of State, which is security based, not because of any interference or improper behaviour but because human rights are over-arching and the Houses of the Oireachtas are the appropriate bodies to which we should answer. We ask committee members to support us in that regard.

We would like to see a specific human rights committee established in the Houses of the Oireachtas. There is the Sub-Committee on Human Rights of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs but we believe human rights apply here as well as abroad and would like to see a committee established with a specific human rights mandate.

I will now hand over to the commissioner, Mr. Michael Farrell. Two anniversaries have been mentioned. Mr. Farrell also celebrates an anniversary this year. He was part of the civil rights movement 40 years ago and has spent a lifetime fighting for civil and human rights.

Mr. Michael Farrell

I thank my colleague for reminding the committee of my advancing age. I welcome this opportunity to speak to the members of the joint committee on the joint work of the two human rights commissions on the island. In particular, I wish to focus on some of the substantive areas of the work undertaken by the joint committee of the two commissions.

As Dr. Manning mentioned, one of the tasks given to the two human rights commissions under the Good Friday Agreement was to consider the possibility of establishing a charter of fundamental rights for the island of Ireland, open to signature by all democratic political parties, reflecting and endorsing agreed measures for the protection of the fundamental rights of everyone living on the Island. We would like to see this charter as an inspirational statement of fundamental rights that would be guaranteed to everyone, wherever they live or find themselves throughout the island. Like other major declarations of rights such as the Constitution or the European Convention on Human Rights, we hope the charter would be a living document that would adapt to changing circumstances and an increasingly diverse society in both jurisdictions on the island, but always in a progressive, expansive and inclusive way.

Progress in developing the charter of fundamental rights has been somewhat slower than we hoped for, partly due to delays in setting up the two human rights commissions. When the joint committee became operational, the charter became a central focus of its meetings and a sub-committee on the charter was set up in March 2002. That sub-committee produced a pre-consultation paper which reflected its thinking on the possible options for and contents of a charter of fundamental rights for the island and invited comment and reaction, without creating a fixed position. Effectively, it stated there were three basic models that could be adopted, namely, first, that it would be purely aspirational, second, that it would be justiciable, that is, it would be enforceable throughout the island, and, third, that it would be somewhere in between. Such a model would encompass a commitment to a set of principles on which laws would be based. That set of principles could be endorsed by the political parties and organisations such as trade unions and so forth. Because it would involve a commitment, political parties could be held to account periodically for the extent to which they were implementing the charter. On the whole, the joint committee was of the view that the third option was probably the best. However, we did not come firmly down in favour of any option.

A number of substantive replies to the pre-consultation document were received, most of which were positive, with constructive comments. Almost everybody adopted the idea of a charter of fundamental rights for the island of Ireland and saw it as a valuable opportunity to further the aims of the Good Friday Agreement by protecting and promoting human rights throughout Ireland. At that point the Bill of Rights process in Northern Ireland intervened. This is a very specific mandate for the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and was seen as a very important part of the overall settlement in Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission concentrated on the process and the joint committee took the view that it was correct to postpone the discussion on a charter of fundamental rights until the process was further developed. The Bill of Rights in Northern Ireland is now moving ahead and, as a result, the joint committee is developing a framework for more sustained work on establishing a charter of fundamental rights for whole island. It intends that the process of developing the charter will continue to be open and consultative and will invite comments from interested parties.

Another area in which the joint committee was very interested was racism. It was very conscious of the major but welcome influx of migrant workers and other immigrants into both jurisdictions on the island and of the growing and visible diversity of society. However, it was also concerned about the, thankfully, limited number of racist incidents in both jurisdictions and aware of the need to develop an inclusive and intercultural society that would make newcomers feel welcome and build good relationships between them and the local population.

From the beginning the joint committee established a racism sub-committee to help co-ordinate the work of both commissions in this area and to contribute to the development of national action plans against racism here and in the UK. One substantial output of the committee's work on racism was its publication of a user's guide to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, CERD, which was used widely by NGOs in the Republic and the North in preparing their interventions when their respective Governments were examined by the UN committee against racial discrimination. It also plays a useful role in increasing consciousness of the convention and how it can be used to foster good race relations. Of particular concern to the sub-committee on racism are the rights of the Traveller community, immigration and trafficking. The commissions work closely on these issues and the sub-committee provides an important opportunity to discuss the possibilities for joint projects.

The commissions are committed to working together on the topic of migrant rights and have called on their respective Governments to ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their Families. As part of the work of the racism sub-committee, the IHRC has carried out substantial research into what changes in law and policy would be required for Ireland to ratify the convention. We have found that the changes needed are not substantial, although this was one of the arguments against its ratification. The commissions have made a commitment to publish a joint guide to the migrant workers convention, which will be similar to the CERD guide. In addition, the commissions share information on the issue of immigration-related detention and the provision of social welfare and health services for immigrants and asylum seekers.

Promoting understanding of and education on human rights is a key function of both commissions and is vital for the long-term development of human rights on the island. Following in the footsteps of the NIHRC, the IHRC is developing its own human rights education strategy, which will be informed by a study we are carrying out to map the extent of human rights education in Ireland.

The commissions actively support the LIFT OFF cross-Border primary school human rights education initiative, which is a partnership between Amnesty International Irish section, Amnesty International UK, the Irish National Teachers Organisation, the Ulster Teachers Union and Education International. The initiative has been positively evaluated but it will continue to need financial and practical support from the Department of Education and Science in the South and the Department of Education in the North if it is to effectively mainstream human rights in education. To further advance human rights in education, consideration should be given to increasing its status within the frame of North-South co-operation through a structure such as a North-South implementation body.

The Chair referred to the equivalent level of rights. The Good Friday Agreement contains a commitment by the British and Irish Governments to a normalisation of security arrangements and practices but while progress has been made towards demilitarisation and reducing the use of Diplock courts in Northern Ireland, with a view to their abolition, there have been no significant developments in regard to the Special Criminal Court in this jurisdiction. It is important that the Irish Government should not appear to make greater demands of others in this area than it is prepared to make of itself.

More generally, the Agreement contains a commitment by the Irish Government to take measures which would ensure at least an equivalent level of protection of human rights to that which will pertain in Northern Ireland. As our president, Dr. Manning, has indicated, a number of the specific measures referred to in the Agreement under that heading have been implemented and we welcome them. However, we see this as a continuing commitment because protections of human rights remain broader in some areas in Northern Ireland than in this jurisdiction. These include the recognition of same sex partnerships and the new identity of transgendered persons. We welcome the publication of the Government's proposals in the area of same sex partnerships and other relationships and hope for similar movement on transgender rights so that human difference and diversity will be accepted in the same spirit in every part of the island.

The commissions also hope that we can persuade the two Governments to speedily ratify the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and to co-operate in improving the position of the most disadvantaged minority in the island. The Government played a positive role in securing the adoption by the UN of the text of the convention but has not yet ratified it.

In this important year, the tenth anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement provides both Governments with an opportunity to reaffirm their strong commitment to the human rights principles contained in the Agreement. It is sometimes forgotten in the current focus on implementation of devolved government that the Agreement makes a fundamental commitment to human rights. This commitment must include renewed support for the role and the work of the two commissions, which form a crucial link between North and South in the area of human rights and which strive to develop a strong human rights framework for the protection and promotion of human rights for every person on this island.

Chairman

I thank Dr. Manning and Mr. Farrell for their wide-ranging presentations, which demonstrate the multilateral dimensions of their work. We commend the IHRC on its co-operation with the NIHRC.

I welcome Senator Bacik to the meeting and congratulate her on the recent birth of her baby.

Senator Ivana Bacik

I thank the Chairman.

Chairman

As we are under pressure for time, I propose to conclude this meeting at 1 p.m. I therefore ask members to be as succinct as possible.

Senator Cecilia Keaveney

I begin with what may be a naive comment. The IFA and the FAI are co-operating on a cross-Border basis in using football in the battle against racism. Some people consider that to be an interesting concept given that sport seems sometimes to be at the core of racist attacks. It seems to have worked, however.

I am preparing a report for the Council of Europe on how history can be taught in areas that have recently experienced conflict. In life, we are all confused about who we are and there appear to be connections between areas of conflict and places that are free of conflict in terms of migration and changing dynamics. In regard to the commissions' human rights education strategy, I asked people whether history should be taught as a subject or used as a mechanism for teaching critical thinking skills. I also asked whether the civil, social and political education curriculum should be related to the teaching of history. Many of the respondents felt people were aware of and interested in their civil rights but had no interest in civic responsibilities. This may not be an issue for the IHRC. Does the human rights education strategy focus solely on rights or does it also teach responsibilities?

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh

I welcome the IHRC and the fact that it has started to produce an e-bulletin, which I received yesterday. It is a useful tool that outlines the work the commission has done recently. Has a list been drawn up of areas where the level of protection of human rights in this State is not at least equivalent to that of the Six Counties? That would be a useful tool for us in asking the Government to address those areas in which there is a shortfall. One of the areas Mr. Farrell mentioned was emergency legislation. Given that there was a recent renewal of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 with very little debate, what can be done to encourage the Government to move quicker on removing the Special Criminal Court and the Offences against the State Act?

My final question is on the level of funding the IHRC enjoys. The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission receives virtually an equivalent budget, despite the fact that the IHRC represents three times the population and all that goes with that. Has the commission's level of funding hampered or prevented its taking on specific cases or workloads?

Deputy Ruairí Quinn

I apologise for arriving late. I listened with interest, however, and read the two scripts. I welcome the three representatives of the IHRC. We need to expand on what Senator Keaveney said on education — we were both at an education committee before this meeting. I would be very interested if, in the course of the development of human rights and education, the IHRC would consider making a presentation to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education and Science. I endorse Senator Keaveney's comment that, given the problems of anti-social behaviour and other issues, there may be an emphasis on rights without a co-responsibility for respecting the rights of others. We should see if it is appropriate to address that. Part of the problem is anti-social behaviour in certain parts of our society. How can the rights mechanism be used to educate people on their rights and the rights of the community?

Mr. Pat Doherty, MLA, MP

I welcome the IHRC. I am glad to be in the same room discussing these very important issues. I want to ask questions in three general areas. The witnesses are aware that this month the British Government will move to begin consultation on a British bill of rights, more properly called the governance of Britain Act. Through the IHRC's work with its counterpart in the North, it is very important that this in no way diminishes or interferes with the commitments in the Good Friday Agreement and the St. Andrews Agreement. There will be a tendency in the North, perhaps from the Unionist community, to say a British Act will be sufficient for us and to try to ignore the work of the human rights commission there. When working with its counterparts, the IHRC should ensure it keeps a focus on that.

Will the witnesses give us some detail on the time scale, resources and personnel involved in the all-Ireland charter of rights? Does the remit of that include economic, social and cultural rights? I have publicly endorsed the call by the two commissions to the British and Irish Governments regarding the Omagh bombing. I have been in dialogue with the Omagh Support and Self Help Group. Have the witnesses any indication that the Irish Government will be prepared to move in that direction, irrespective of what the British Government does?

Dr. Alasdair McDonnell, MLA, MP

I have two or three minor questions. Where are we? One of the important matters mentioned was evolving democracies in former states of the USSR in eastern Europe. It may not be domestic and I do not want to externalise the agenda, but this is very important because on the rare occasion I have managed to visit some of these places they have been screaming for any help or support they can get. Will the witnesses tell us more about where they have a connectivity there?

The delegates mentioned immigrants and I have become increasingly concerned that those coming from the EU, by which we usually mean eastern European countries within the EU boundaries, have a serious difficulty. Very limited human rights are accorded, particularly to those seeking asylum. I am talking about access to health care for school children and school meals. It struck me that a number of primary schools in my patch are heavily over-burdened with foreign nationals, not unlike some of the schools here. The principal of one school told me she has more problems trying to get justice for some of the children than she has trying to get them educated. There is an issue around the rights of poorly documented — I will not say non-documented — people. Romanians appear to be somewhat deprived, particularly the Roma people. Some of them have not been to school and because they are poorly documented, they do not receive their entitlements. It may be a small issue relative to the bigger picture, but a group of people are being denied proper education and social support.

Does the IHRC have a view on the devolution of policing and justice? It referred to the improving situation in the North. Is it a bridge too far for me to ask that question? Would devolution improve the situation? Would it be easier to work in that situation or would it make no difference to the human rights agenda?

Senator Ivana Bacik

I thank the Chairman for his kind words of welcome. I, too, welcome the IHRC and want to raise two issues. The presentations were very interesting and they raised a number of important points. I support the call for direct accountability of the commission to the Houses of the Oireachtas rather than to a Department. That is very important. I would like to know what those of us on the committee who support that can do to progress that change in the line of accountability. It would be a great development if we could see that change.

In the presentations there was mention of the equivalence of rights protections North and South. Deputy Ó Snodaigh's suggestion regarding a list of areas would be very helpful. The issues about the Special Criminal Court raised by the witnesses are important. When that matter came up in the Seanad a couple of weeks ago I was critical of how we renewed the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act without any real debate. The issues of same sex partnerships and transgender rights are also important. Two other obvious examples of where I do not believe our rights protections are equivalent in the Republic and the North struck me. One of these is criminal justice, where suspects in Garda custody do not have the right to have a solicitor present when being questioned. Could the delegation comment on that?

The other issue is that women with crisis pregnancies in the Republic do not have clarity in terms of the law applicable here. We are still covered by the judgment in the X case. The level of protection for women with crisis pregnancies here is not equivalent to that offered in Northern Ireland where, although the Abortion Act 1967 has not been extended, there is greater legal flexibility, particularly in cases such as Ms D, the case of a woman whose pregnancy would have resulted, sadly, in the birth of a child who would not have survived long after birth. This is an important issue and I would like to see greater equivalence. What are the views of the commission?

Senator Joe O’Reilly

I welcome the representatives of the Irish Human Rights Commission, in particular its president, my friend, Dr. Manning, whom I first met as a popular university teacher when I went to college. I do not wish to date the man, he was only starting at that stage and I was a young entrant.

On the point picked up by Senator Bacik, it is important that a change be made to make the Irish Human Rights Commission answerable to the Houses of the Oireachtas. This change would be welcome and should be pursued. On the recommendation of Dr. Manning, we will take up the matter because it would be an important change that should be addressed by our respective parties. It would be the logical route to take. Contemporary events across the water indicate that we should never take the maintenance of human rights for granted; we should never assume everything will be all right.

It is important that work should continue on the charter of fundamental human rights for the whole of the island of Ireland. It is disappointing that it has not been brought to fruition. Perhaps our guests might comment on the expected timeframe. I take the point that they were waiting for the Bill of Rights in Northern Ireland to be advanced but this aspect should be pursued.

It is clear to those of us involved in public representation that the rights of newcomers to our new multicultural society present the greatest challenge we face. Our responsibility towards the people concerned and the protection of their rights is critical. I have much anecdotal evidence that, due to cultural background and a lack of understanding of our social mores and culture, a number of newcomers have difficulties accepting the responsibilities that go with citizenship. Some of these difficulties may arise from a lack of educational and economic opportunities. However, there is a problem that could lead to social friction. The District Courts are littered with cases of newcomers who are not au fait with our laws, culture and mores and who may not strive anxiously to be so. How will the commission respond and help to bridge the gap? Our greatest task is to adhere to our responsibilities and do what is right but we must also achieve reciprocity and mutuality.

Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP

I join in the welcome to the delegates and appreciate their attendance as I have occupied the seats they now occupy in a different committee setting.

This meeting has been very useful. We would welcome the opportunity to meet the commission in the North to discuss some of the issues raised. I add my support to calls for an all-Ireland charter of fundamental human rights, given the difficulties I see through my ministerial responsibilities. There are different ways of doing things north and south of the Border that add to problems in agriculture. Therefore, it would be important to have an all-Ireland charter of fundamental human rights. Our party president, Mr. Gerry Adams, has raised this issue with both the British and Irish Governments and we would like to see this work continue. We will do what we can to support it.

I was recently involved in a debate about the Agricultural Wages Board, a body funded by my department to set rates of pay for agricultural workers. There is a strong agri-food sector in Northern Ireland and I was disappointed when other parties represented in the Assembly opposed the retention of the board. Does the commission have thoughts on this matter? The board sets rates of pay and terms and conditions for agri-food workers and it was argued that minimum wage legislation rendered it unnecessary. However, we are of the view that without strong support for the rights of agricultural workers and with different pay scales applying we will not be able to find agricultural workers in the North. This may tie in with ratification of the UN Convention on the Human Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, an issue we would be happy to discuss with the commission at a future date.

I thank the delegates for the presentation and wish them luck in their work.

Deputy Johnny Brady

I apologise for being late; I was at a meeting of the Joint Committee on Agricuture, Fisheries and Food that started at 9.30 a.m. and did not finish until noon.

I am a member of committee D of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body which has held meetings on immigration in Belfast and Dublin. Another is to take place across the water this weekend but, unfortunately, I cannot attend. We discuss immigration into all parts of the jurisdiction. At the meeting in Dublin a couple of weeks ago we spoke of the conditions in which the unfortunate people concerned lived. Not only in the city but throughout the country they are being left in very poor conditions. This is not right. Our own people would not live in such conditions and it is very unfair that the people concerned should have to rent such accommodation. Action must be taken. I am not sure whether the delegates have influence in this regard but it is an issue that must urgently be examined.

I am delighted the delegates are present, among them a former Member of the Houses, Dr. Manning, whom I wish well in his new role.

Senator Donie Cassidy

I apologise for my late arrival; I had to take the Order of Business in the Seanad which the former Deputy, Senator and Leader of the House, Dr. Manning, knows must take precedence.

I welcome Dr. Manning and his delegation which includes Mr. Farrell and Ms Roberts. Dr. Manning's reputation precedes him and I wish him well in his work.

I join Ms Gildernew in hoping for an all-Ireland charter of fundamental human rights. We would love to see such a charter in place and hope agreement can be reached on it. The work of the commission is extremely important and we are fortunate Dr. Manning occupies the position he holds. He has excelled at everything in which he has been involved and has generally been exemplary. It is a privilege to be present to receive the submission and I will be only too pleased to do anything I can through Seanad Éireann to enhance the good work done by the commission.

Dr. Maurice Manning

I thank members for their contributions. Mr. Farrell and I will divide our answers — I will give him the hard questions and I will take the easy ones.

Senator Keaveney raised a question to which I do not have the answer today. However, as Senator O'Reilly mentioned, I used to teach history, so I have a professional interest in the subject of whether history can be used to exacerbate or to heal problems. Some interesting work is being done in Northern Ireland at present, under the heading of conflict resolution, on history and how we present it. It is a huge subject. Countries such as Spain, after its civil war, and Ireland, after our Civil War, have had to come to terms with how to deal with events that were divisive and brutal. I do not have an answer in this regard.

Senator Keaveney also made an important point about human rights education, which was also made by Deputy Quinn. Human rights education is not about a charter for selfishness. The questions of personal, social and community responsibility are central. Sometimes when people are attacking human rights they do so as if it were just a charter to validate all sorts of selfish or sectional behaviours. It is not that. Major and unrecognised work is being done in our schools in integrating the many ethnic groups that are present while handling the curriculum. Deputy Quinn knows where I live and he knows the two schools beside me in which, 15 years ago, all the pupils were Irish and Catholic, while today there are 17 different ethnic groups. This is a common experience around Dublin and the teachers have played a major role in coming to terms with that. We in the human rights commission see education as important. We cannot educate but we hope to be in a position to provide materials and guidance in co-operation with the teaching unions and the Department of Education and Science to further this agenda. This is a big question but there is a real possibility of progress.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh asked about the specific areas of equivalence. I will ask Mr. Farrell to deal with this interesting question. He also raised the question of funding. We have a funding problem; it is a crisis. We were seriously underfunded this year and we are in danger of going broke before the end of the year. We are in talks to try to ensure this does not happen. It is a crisis and I thank the Deputy for raising the issue.

Deputy Quinn raised the question of accountability to the Oireachtas. We will put a proposal, I hope before the end of this year, to all parties in the Oireachtas to seek their support on this. As I said, human rights is an overarching issue that affects every area of life. We feel the Oireachtas is the body to which we should be accountable. We would be very happy to do that.

Mr. Doherty — I was going to say "the Honourable Member" but he told me he did not want to be called that — raised the question of the bill of rights. Mr. Farrell will deal with that in more detail. It makes sense that there should first be a bill of rights before we have a charter of rights for the whole island. The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission is centrally involved in trying to advance this project and it needs all the political support it can get. I know it will do its job fearlessly and to the best of its ability. The problem is to try to persuade the various political parties in Northern Ireland to give it support before we can move on. We see it very much as a work in progress. Mr. Farrell will say a little more on that. It would be surprising and wrong if there were not a commitment to economic, social and cultural rights in an all-island charter. We strongly advocate such an inclusion. Mr. Doherty also asked about Omagh. I cannot speak for the Irish Government on that but the request made by the two human rights commissions, which he has backed, is a reasonable one and I hope it will be supported.

Dr. McDonnell asked about some of the countries with which we have been working. We have been working specifically with Bulgaria, which is keen to establish a human rights commission. In addition, curiously, although it is not in eastern Europe, we have worked with Italian political parties and I was part of a group that spoke to a committee of the Italian Senate on the establishment of a human rights commission there. We have sent people out to a number of other areas under the auspices of the UN and the OSCE to give advice on the establishment of such bodies and to train people. We are hosting a major conference in September with the Council of Europe at which all the eastern European countries will be represented and we will attempt to help them establish commissions.

Dr. McDonnell also asked about policing and devolution. We do not have a view on that. We are a national commission and we only work in this jurisdiction. However, we see policing as being an important aspect of human rights and human rights as being at the centre of policing. We have carried out a major study on policing and human rights here which we hope will be a prototype in contributing to reforms in the Garda Síochána to ensure it is a fully human rights-compliant police force. We have received great co-operation from the Garda in this regard. We sit on its strategic human rights committee and we are working in partnership with it in a way that ensures we can make a great deal of progress, which will be mutually beneficial.

Senator Bacik also asked about Oireachtas accountability. We welcome any support we can get on that. Mr. Farrell will deal with equivalence. Senator O'Reilly was in short trousers when I was teaching him. I thank him for his warm wishes and his support on the question of accountability of the commission to the Oireachtas. I thank Ms Gildernew for her warm words. We would love to be invited to her jurisdiction and to be of any assistance we can. She mentioned the charter of rights and migrant workers, which will be dealt with by Mr. Farrell. I thank Deputy Brady for his comments. There is one area in which he could be of help to us. Now that there is a Scottish human rights body with a very able leader, Professor Alan Miller, and a similar commission for England and Wales, it would be useful if our two commissions could speak to the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body. I ask Deputy Brady to use his good offices in his respect because it would be useful to engage with that body. Deputy Blaney, who is gone, probably has even more influence in that regard.

Deputy Johnny Brady

I will bring the matter to its attention.

Dr. Maurice Manning

I thank the Deputy. I thank my old friend, Senator Cassidy, for his kind words this morning. I watched him on the Order of Business on the monitor and he has lost none of his old skills. I will now ask Mr. Farrell to deal with the other questions.

Mr. Michael Farrell

Following from what my colleague, Dr. Manning, has said, we are very impressed by the level of engagement of committee members on this issue, as evidenced by the high attendance and range of questions asked. It is encouraging to us that there is that degree of interest in the work of the human rights commissions. Of course, it has also created a problem because the enormous range of questions is almost impossible to cover. Dr. Manning has dealt with some and I will try to deal with some, but inevitably there will be issues we will not cover.

Senator Keaveney, Deputy Quinn and others mentioned the question of education and rights and responsibilities. Human rights education such as we are talking about comes down to self-respect and respect for others. By teaching people about human rights and their rights, we hope they are also taught self-respect and that if they respect themselves they must also respect others. That in itself helps people to be more responsible in their attitudes. As Dr. Manning said, tremendous work has been done in schools under very difficult circumstances, including the presence of large immigrant populations, children who do not speak English and so on. They need more resources but have coped very well with what they have. There is a good attitude in schools which try to inculcate in indigenous children that they must respect other children and their somewhat different customs and so on. That has a lot to do with teaching children. If they imbibe the obligation to respect others' differences, it should make them behave more responsibly themselves. I do not believe there is antagonism between the two objectives, teaching rights and responsibilities.

Other issues were raised, including the equivalence of protections, North and South, an issue on which the two commissions have not worked. It is an interesting idea and perhaps one we should consider. A prominent Irish academic, Dr. Colm Ó Cinnéide, has conducted a study of the implementation of aspects of the Good Friday Agreement, North and South, which moves somewhat in the same direction and is a valuable contribution. I have referred to a couple of areas where rights are probably better protected in Northern Ireland and there would be others. I imagine that is the case because Northern Ireland has come out of period of conflict and everyone concerned sees it as important to put in place very strong human rights protections in order that neither of the major communities nor the new communities oppress or will be oppressed. It is natural that some developments in this area would set headlines for this jurisdiction.

We see it as a two-way process. There are areas in which this jurisdiction does not do too badly. For instance, the Northern Ireland commission conducted a study of women in prison and came down to visit the Dóchas centre, the women's prison at Mountjoy. Some of the Southern commission members, including me, went with them. They came away very impressed, seeing the Dóchas Centre as a model of how a prison should be run. They said there was nothing equal to it in Northern Ireland. That is an area in which we are ahead. I would add that we have a worry in that regard. In the plan to reorganise prisons in the Dublin area and move to the new prison in north County Dublin, we fear that the very fine experiment carried out in the Dóchas centre may be lost in the administration of a very large super prison. Tremendous work has been done and the centre is seen as model of how to deal with prisoners, respect their humanity, teach them self-respect and generally be rehabilitative. It would be a tragedy to lose that experience by being caught up in a super prison.

We have been very critical of Government policy on asylum seekers and so on. Nonetheless, we have treated such persons more humanely than they have been treated in the British jurisdiction. What happens in Northern Ireland is that if people are to be detained — the authorities detain asylum seekers quite a lot — they are actually taken out of Northern Ireland and brought to a prison in Scotland. This has caused problems in cases where migrants and asylum seekers have strayed across the Border from the Republic and are found in the North. Some have been transferred to Scotland, breaking connections with family members here. On the whole, up to now we have avoided high levels of detention of undocumented immigrants. The commission has expressed concern about the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill that makes provision for further detention of immigrants. On the whole, however, we do better on this issue than the British jurisdiction. This should be a two-way process. We can learn from some of the new developments in Northern Ireland as a result of the peace settlement but equally there are some things which are done better here, from which the Northern Ireland jurisdiction can learn. We should see this as an opportunity not to claim one side is better than the other but as a way to raise the level on all sides. Equivalence should be a matter of moving upwards, not a levelling downwards at any stage. One hopes for that much.

The question of policing was raised. Because of the situation in Northern Ireland there has been a complete reorganisation of the police service. It is now called the Police "Service". This has been very welcome and in many ways is a model of how to do things. The development has led to welcome changes in the Garda but there is still quite a lot of work to be done. As Dr. Manning said, we are very involved and about to publish a study on the subject.

The charter of fundamental rights and the question of emergency legislation were raised by Deputy Ó Snodaigh. On emergency legislation, it is a question of equivalence. As there is demilitarisation and a winding down of the security apparatus in Northern Ireland, the same should clearly happen here. If this can be done in the North, there is much less justification for having extraordinary security measures in the Republic where the security problem is nothing like what it is, or was, in the North. We are of the view that the Republic should be trying to move towards a society governed by the rule of law, where no exceptional measures would be taken, except in the most extreme circumstances. We should try to return to a system based on jury trial in all cases. If it is considered there is a necessity to protect juries, they should be protected rather than abolished and there are ways in which this can be done.

Senator Bacik mentioned ordinary criminal law. Here, for instance, for a long time there was no video recording of interviews by the Garda. A number of recent trials have demonstrated that it is actually in the interests of the justice system to have video recording because prosecutions failed. People were acquitted because statements had been taken from them without any record other than gardaí writing such statements down, claiming that such and such was what a person had said. We always argued that video recording was in the interests of everyone concerned — the police, the community that sought to secure justice and defendants. This has been well demonstrated. In the Northern Ireland system solicitors are allowed to attend interviews. This does not prevent people being convicted but it does protect the rights of the suspect and, to quite an extent, police officers from allegations that they have beaten people up or put words in their mouth and so on. We have something to learn in that regard.

Generally, in the matter of emergency legislation, the commission has been exceptionally critical. We considered that we should come up to international standards. The UN Human Rights Committee which is about to examine Ireland's report again in the next couple of weeks has repeatedly stated it does not see the need for the Special Criminal Court to continue and that steps should be taken to get rid of it.

Concerning the charter of fundamental rights, there has been a difficulty. There is a specific mandate to establish a Bill of Rights in Northern Ireland, for which we can all see the reasons. It is a society that was deeply divided between two communities and which has now become a little more complex, although that complexity is welcome in that there are now new communities. The last thing one wants to see is oppression of one community being ended only to be followed by oppression of other communities. It is necessary to have a Bill of Rights in place but it has been a difficult process. Significant consultation has taken place on it but it has not been easy, as the Northern representatives present will be very well aware. The Northern commission must now concentrate on pulling together a draft position. We have had to respect this and believed it was the most urgent objective. There is a commitment in the Agreement to a Bill of Rights. There has been less emphasis on the matter in the Republic than in the North. In the North it has been superseded by the Bill of Rights. What Deputies and Senators have said here is very welcome, as is the emphasis they have placed on the issue. It is welcome because it gives us encouragement to move ahead with the process.

Either Deputy Ó Snodaigh or Mr. Doherty — whom I should perhaps call "Deputy" Doherty — asked whether economic, social and cultural rights would be included in the charter of fundamental rights.

Mr. Pat Doherty, MLA, MP

That would perhaps be the SDLP.

Mr. Michael Farrell

It is our view that economic, social and cultural rights should be included. There is the Constitution, while both jurisdictions apply the European Convention on Human Rights. The charter of rights will, I hope, be broader than that and will include rights not included so clearly in those two documents.

Approximately two years ago the commission undertook a major consultation on economic, social and cultural rights and we must take the matter forward. It should be included but other things have come up in the meantime. We would like to move on but the crunch time for the bill of rights in Northern Ireland will come in the next six months and we must respect that process. We are trying to lay the groundwork for moving on as soon as that is completed.

It was very interesting that various Deputies, as well as Dr. Alasdair McDonnell from the North, talked about the conditions of migrants and immigrants. The only people who used to come to the Republic of Ireland were asylum seekers but they have been superseded by a large group of immigrant workers, such as Poles, Lithuanians, etc. Various problems arise in such circumstances, such as the problem of undocumented people, namely, those who fall out of legality or who come on work permits which are not renewed by employers. Those people are left in a very vulnerable position because under the existing system if they continue to work but do not have a work permit they are not entitled to social security benefits.

We also have a habitual residence condition which makes it very difficult for people from outside the country to get social welfare unless they have been in the country for quite a while and everything about their employment is legitimate. Frequently that is not the case and it is not their fault but that of employers who do not apply for work permits for them and do not pay PRSI. There is a need to look after such people and our system needs to be more flexible to understand the difficulties in which undocumented workers find themselves. One of the values of the migrant convention is to stress the rights of undocumented people. They are human beings and they must be treated in a reasonable way.

The Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development, Ms Gildernew, mentioned the agriculture industry but we have no particular expertise in that area. There are concerns about employers undercutting wages by bringing in people, paying them very low wages and keeping them in very bad conditions. This can lead to tensions, especially in a recession, between the indigenous and immigrant workforce and the best way to deal with the tension is to ensure immigrant workers are treated the same as national workers. Much work needs to be done on that issue and it is one of many areas in which we are interested. It is very encouraging that there is such a level of interest by elected representatives on both sides of the Border.

Senator Bacik asked about crisis pregnancies and the position in regard to abortion legislation. Our commission has experienced difficulties in coming to terms with this issue and during the last abortion referendum the commission was divided. We felt in the circumstances that the best and most honest thing to do was to say that half the commission took one view and half another. As in most of Irish society, there are divisions but we must work our way through the issue and try to achieve respect and protection for the rights of women and children.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Farrell. We are deeply grateful for the frank, positive and detailed responses he has given to all the questions asked. I thank all the members of the commission for attending. The fact that 15 members of the committee attended the meeting shows the respect in which the delegates are held and the importance of their role in human rights. We will take on board the various recommendations they have made. I concur with colleagues who suggest that it is appropriate, as Dr. Manning requested, for the commission to report to the Oireachtas. After we hear the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commissioner, Ms Monica McWilliams, in September, we will review the situation and will come to a conclusion at our October meeting and make a recommendation as to the reporting arrangements. We will certainly take up Mr. Farrell's request on the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

On the question of funding, the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee on Human Rights is about to undertake a comparative study on resources allocated to human rights commissions across Europe, which may be of assistance to the IHRC. We will also write to the relevant line Minister with a recommendation that the IHRC be given equitable treatment in the allocation of resources for next year, taking into account the work it does.

The Irish Human Rights Commission and Ireland as a State have a significant role to play in the protection of human rights. I salute the co-operation of the IHRC with the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and its excellent and vital work in the area of education. This is critical to the consensual, progressive and informed evolution of all the population on the island of Ireland, taking into account the modern multicultural society that exists and must be embedded, integrated and protected in an equitable way as we go forward together. The commission is to be congratulated on its work in this field and on very often being the voice of those who can often be seen as the weaker members of our society and whose voices are often not easily heard. We look forward to engaging with the IHRC on the issue of human rights and I hope it will be in a position to come before the joint committee again in the autumn, with its counterparts from Northern Ireland, to discuss further the progress of the Bill of Rights. I thank the delegates very much.

Is there any other business? If not, I propose we hold the next meeting on Thursday, 11 September 2008 at 11.30 a.m. If anybody has a difficulty with that date he or she should let me know. In particular, we do not want to clash with anything involving the members from Northern Ireland.

Ms Michelle Gildernew, MLA, MP

I am not sure if there is a meeting of the Executive on that day.

Chairman

As we have previously pledged, we will not allow a meeting to clash with the Executive. If there is a clash we will change the date.

Senator Joe O’Reilly

There is a Council of Europe event around that time which might present difficulty for one or more members.

Chairman

We will look at the situation regarding the Council of Europe and the Executive and if the meeting cannot be held on 11 September, it will be held on 18 September.

Lunch is booked and we are on time. If we all leave together the clerk will take us internally so that we will not be exposed to the inclement weather.

The joint committee adjourned at 1 p.m. until 11.30 a.m. on Thursday, 11 September 2008.