Northern Ireland's Emergency Laws and International Human Rights
| Date | 01 June 1993 |
| Published date | 01 June 1993 |
| DOI | 10.1177/016934419301100204 |
| Author | Brice Dickson,Paul Hunt |
| Subject Matter | Part A: Article |
Northern Ireland's Emergency Laws
and International
Human
Rights
Paul Hunt and Brice Dickson»
Abstract
In this article, international law of human rights is used as a yardstick against which to
measure the emergency provisions operating in Northern Ireland, where special trial
procedures have been in place since 1973 for persons accused of terrorist offenses. In
particular, the use of juries has been withdrawn, all matters of fact and law being decided
instead by a single judge in the so called 'Diplock' courts. There are many unsatisfactory
features of the emergency legislation associated with the Diplock court proceedings.
Because
of
these features, it is probable that some defendants in the Diplock court system
are not afforded the fair trial to which they are entitled under the international law of
human rights. With respect to arrest, interrogation, the admissibility of confessions, the
right of silence, access to family and lawyer, there is a risk that the requirements
of
a fair
trial, as set out in Article 5
ECHR
and Article 14 ICCPR, are not met. Also, the
Northern Ireland's law on the use of lethal force may not comply with the European
Convention's standard on protecting the right to life. The authors conclude that
international human rights standards would be better protected in Northern Ireland if the
European Convention on Human Rights were incorporated in domestic law. The British
Government should ratify Protocol 4 to the Convention which would extend the rights
guaranteed to individuals within the United Kingdom, and the first Optional Protocol to
the ICCPR, thereby giving individuals an alternative mechanism for addressing violations
of human rights.
Introduction
After the Second World War there was a revolution in the field of international human
rights.IIn a single generation the international community agreed a substantial and
complex code of new law which defined legally protected human rights for all human
beings. The code built upon the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which
was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948, and now includes the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as well as regional human rights
enumerated, for the first time, international human rights which no longer lie in the gift
of states but belong to all human beings 'inalienably'. Not only does the code carry
considerable moral authority, but some of its components bestow legally enforceable
responsibilities upon states and rights upon individuals.
It
is appropriate, therefore, to use the international law of human rights as a yardstick
against which to measure the emergency provisions operating in Northern Ireland. The
*Paul Hunt is Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Waikato, New Zealand. Brice Dickson is
Professor of Law at the University of Ulster, Northern Ireland.
1 See 'Rights and Responsibilities in International Law', chapter 2 in S. Bailey (ed.), Human Rights and
Responsibilities in Britain and Ireland, Macmillan, London 1988; also P. Sieghart, The Lawful Rights
of
Mankind, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1985, passim.
173
To continue reading
Request your trial