Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:2 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the number of officials from his Department represented on the Standing Interdepartmental Committee on Human Rights; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9000/99]
Ceisteanna – Questions. - Committee on Human Rights.
John Bruton
Ceist:3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the reason his Department is represented on the Interdepartmental Committee on Human Rights; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9869/99]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 3 together.
My Department has one representative on the Standing Interdepartmental Committee on Human Rights. The committee, chaired by the Department of Foreign Affairs, considers all aspects of Ireland's international human rights obligations. It focuses on the implications for domestic policy of the commitments given by the State in ratifying major international human rights instruments. All Departments are invited to be represented on the committee because of the broad scope of human rights. This, together with the importance I accord to keeping up to date on developments in the area, is the reason my Department is represented.
The inaugural meeting was held on 18 February 1997 and the committee has met on five occasions since, most recently on 16 March last. The committee is concerned with the timely preparation of comprehensive national reports under international instruments already ratified. It also seeks to expedite the necessary legislation for the ratification of additional instruments. The committee is preparing for the examination of Ireland's first report under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights before the relevant UN committee in Geneva in May. The committee also plays an important role as a forum for co-ordination and co-operation between Departments on human rights issues.
Was the committee asked to give an opinion concerning the draft legislation prepared by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform in respect of our obligation under the Good Friday Agreement to implement a human rights commission? If it was asked to give an opinion, did it express a view in respect of Ireland's requirement or on the desirability of incorporating into domestic law the European Convention on Human Rights?
It discussed and considered the human rights aspects of the Good Friday Agreement. I do not have a draft of the proposals put forward, but it was involved in consideration of the implications and in the work done following it.
Is the Taoiseach saying the only interdepartmental committee of the Government on human rights was not specifically communicated with or requested to offer a view on domestic legislation regarding human rights? Is the background information that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform did not bother to contact the committee?
I am saying the opposite, that the committee, which deals with the domestic situation, was contacted and was involved in the human rights implications of the Good Friday Agreement, especially the setting up of human rights commissions in both parts of the country.
Was a review offered in respect of the draft legislation before the committees of this House and did it include a recommendation that the country should incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic law, as the UK has done?
I do not have a report of what the committee said on the legislation, but it had a full input into its preparation.
Where does the problem lie in incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into Irish law and in what respects is the convention in conflict with the Constitution?
This matter has been discussed for a considerable time. The legislation being prepared is based on the constitutional position and is the best legislation we can propose at this time. It was considered at length and I hope it is satisfactory. It has also been discussed on the basis of what is happening with the British legislation. I do not, therefore, believe there is a difficulty with our proposals.
Is the Taoiseach saying there is not an Article in the Constitution which is in conflict with the European Convention on Human Rights and that therefore the convention can be incorporated in toto in domestic law without any contradiction occurring?
I am not saying that. Deputy Quinn asked why we have proceeded in the manner we have. We have done so because of the advice afforded us. The legislation we have pre pared and before the committees takes account of the constitutional position as advised by the Attorney General.
In what area of the Constitution is there a conflict with the European Convention on Human Rights? What aspect of the convention is in conflict with the Constitution?
That question requires a detailed reply.
It is a reasonable question.
It would be reasonable if the Deputy gave me notice of it. In the discussions on the Bill we had taken into account the constitutional position and the advice of the Attorney General. The legislation was drafted on that basis.
Did the Taoiseach not negotiate this as part of the Good Friday Agreement? He has admitted there is a contradiction between the European Convention on Human Rights and the Constitution. Does he know what it is?
While I negotiated this matter I did not draft the legislation and while I received various submissions on how it should be done, I did not compile the legal report of the Attorney General into the matter, where he spelt out the differences.
A member of the Taoiseach's Department was on this interdepartmental committee and his Department was central to the negotiation of the Good Friday Agreement. Does the Taoiseach agree that the Agreement requires us to establish a human rights commission? My party drafted legislation which proposed inter alia that the incorporation into domestic law of the European Convention on Human Rights would be desirable. Notwithstanding that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform chose to refuse to admit this. Was the member of the Taoiseach's Department who was a member of this committee involved at any stage in communicating to him the desirability or otherwise of such an incorporation into domestic legislation? Alternatively did that committee offer an explicit view in the normal process of consultation to the drafting of the heads of the legislation which are now before a committee of this House and did that view include a specific recommendation that the incorporation of the convention should form part of our domestic law?
There is not a detailed question to me today on what happened during the drafting of that legislation. Had there been I would have answered it.
Fair enough.
The matter was discussed and proposals were submitted to the committee for its views. It was part of what the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform was doing. I do not have with me the report of the committee's views although I saw that report. I also saw the Attorney General's view on what could and could not be accepted. However, I am not prepared to guess on either of those things.
I am quite surprised the Taoiseach does not have this basic information about a contradiction between a European convention and the Constitution, both of which documents have existed for longer than he has been in politics. Does the contradiction between the convention and the Constitution relate to abortion?
I am not prepared to outline the issues but a number of issues were put forward in the Attorney General's report, not just one.
He should know this.
I am not prepared on an unrelated question—
It is a related question—
No. This question is about a committee and whether I had an official on it.
—about human rights.
There was a question in the drafting of the legislation which is where the Attorney General put forward a report based on the constitutionality of what we could or could not do. What the Deputy has asked about is not in this question and I will not, off the top of my head, answer that wrongly in the House.
He has not even a rough idea.