{"title":"Devolution and international human rights monitoring mechanisms","authors":"Brice Dickson","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1070","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1070","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses how the protection of human rights in the three devolved regions of the United Kingdom (UK) has been periodically monitored at the international level since devolution took effect in 1999. It looks at the work of the 10 United Nations monitoring mechanisms to which the UK has subscribed and at seven Council of Europe mechanisms. A summary is provided of the degree to which the UK’s national reports, responses to lists of issues and replies to questionnaires have referred to human rights issues in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and there is then a summary of references made to those jurisdictions in the monitoring body’s concluding observations or reports, especially when the references express concerns about whether the rights in question are being fully protected in accordance with treaty requirements. The analysis reveals that UK national reports do now include a lot of information about how rights are protected in the devolved regions, even if the devolved administrations themselves, especially in Northern Ireland, are not always as cooperative as they should be in compiling the national reports. The monitoring bodies also now pay close attention to regional variations in the protection of rights and at times issue recommendations directed at the devolved administrations, while emphasising that the UK Government has ultimate responsibility for compliance with treaty obligations. The case study illustrates various well-known defects in the international monitoring system, such as delays, duplication of effort and lack of enforcement powers.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41341066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Human rights and the righting of ‘historical’ wrongs: the Supreme Court’s judgment in Re McQuillan, McGuigan, and McKenna","authors":"Natasa Mavronicola","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1028","url":null,"abstract":"This comment examines particular aspects of the Supreme Court’s judgment in McQuillan, McGuigan and McKenna, notably its reasoning and findings in respect of the investigative obligation emanating from the right not to be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as it related to the case of the ‘Hooded Men’. Although the Supreme Court acknowledged that the subjection of the Hooded Men to the so-called ‘five techniques’ of interrogation in 1971 would, today, be characterised as ‘torture’, and in spite of new evidence linking named members of the United Kingdom (UK) Government to the authorisation of the ‘five techniques’, the court found that there was no basis for recognising the applicability or revival of UK authorities’ obligation to investigate under article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In this case commentary, I consider the court’s analysis and conclusions and reflect briefly on their significance in the context of an uninterrupted ‘history’ of British involvement in torture.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47670159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The devil is in the details: entrenching human rights protections in the UK’s devolved nations","authors":"Kasey McCall-Smith","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1030","url":null,"abstract":"In states with multilevel governance systems, such as the United Kingdom (UK), human rights are subject to variable gradations of implementation based on the political will and the legal competence of the subnational governments to implement international law. Entrenching rights through incorporation secures domestic enforcement, which, in turn, paves the way for proactive human rights culture change and guards against human rights regression. This article examines the future of increasing human rights protections in the devolved nations of the UK in the wake of the Incorporation Reference decision. First, the article reflects on the opportunity to entrench international human rights protections through incorporation as one form of implementation. Next, Scotland’s path to increasing implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) will be presented, including an examination of the key features of the UNCRC (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill. These features are then juxtaposed against the challenges raised in the Incorporation Reference case. International law is the lens through which the analysis is delivered, aligning with UN human rights treaty body guidance and focused on delivering human rights in national settings. Finally, the article argues that, despite the difficulty posed by the interpretation of devolved legal competence delivered in the Incorporation Reference judgment, from the perspective of international law, there remains a great opportunity to entrench human rights in the devolved nations through incorporation legislation and other measures that respect, protect and fulfil human rights.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44627063","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Prisoner voting in Wales: devolved autonomy and human rights at the jagged edge","authors":"G. Davies, Robert Jones","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1016","url":null,"abstract":"In light of recent contestation between the UK Government and devolved institutions over legal human rights protections, this article examines the acute challenges that arise in the Welsh context for the implementation of article 3 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), namely the right to free and fair elections. The European Court of Human Rights has held repeatedly that a blanket prohibition on convicted prisoner voting is a violation of the ECHR. Following the devolution of competences over devolved and local elections, the fundamental question for Wales is not merely whether prisoners should get the vote, but how a more progressive policy can be delivered within the current structures of Welsh devolution. We argue that the Welsh Government’s proposals for reform – partial enfranchisement based on sentence length – will be conditioned and undermined by criminal law and sentencing policy over which it has no control. Meanwhile, other options are either beyond devolved competence or entirely contingent upon the cooperation of a UK Government which opposes prisoner enfranchisement. In tackling these issues, we aim to demonstrate the profoundly limited nature of ‘devolved autonomy’ in an area ostensibly within the competence of Welsh institutions. The case study of prisoner voting thus brings into focus the unique and significant limitations on Welsh devolution and the considerable scope for complexity at the intersection of devolved governance and international human rights obligations.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48648257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"International human rights law, devolution and democratic legitimacy: the case study of abortion reform in Northern Ireland","authors":"Jane M. Rooney","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1021","url":null,"abstract":"This article uses the case study of abortion law reform to critically assess what is required to secure democratic legitimacy in complying with international human rights law (IHRL) obligations. The case study exposes the inadequacy of the devolution arrangement. The article critiques the methodology through which the views, interests and priorities of the two systems are upheld and protected: a mere bifurcation of competence over law and decision-making. The devolution framework frames democratic legitimacy as requiring the representation of interests of only two governance systems to be balanced – the devolved people of Northern Ireland versus the collective interests of the United Kingdom (UK). Other systems of people with separate interests should be identified and represented. The article assesses the role and challenges that IHRL presents in securing democratic legitimacy. On the one hand, it feeds into an iterative process of ensuring that the voices of those most affected by the law at issue are at the forefront of the law-making process – it facilitates their engagement with the state apparatus. On the other hand, the incorporation of IHRL must be consistent with the aims of the devolution framework: to balance the democratic will of the people of Northern Ireland and the collective will of the UK. If we work from the premise that IHRL is democracy-enhancing in itself, then we need to prioritise inclusive processes for deciding the content of those norms and ensuring they are practically implemented. Devolution politics should not form a barrier to this overall goal.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44220983","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"International human rights law and devolution in the UK","authors":"Jane M. Rooney, Conor Mccormick","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1092","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1092","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction to the Special Issue on 'International Human Rights Law and Devolution in the UK'","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44695681","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Subnational incorporation of economic, social and cultural rights – can devolution become a vehicle for progressive human rights reform?","authors":"Katie Boyle, N. Busby","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1013","url":null,"abstract":"Devolution acts as both a foundation and a potential vehicle for progressive human rights reform. This article examines progress within the current Scottish framework, including the incorporation of international treaties, as recommended by the National Taskforce for Human Rights Leadership. The particular nature of devolution provides the opportunity to close the accountability gap in the protection of economic, social and cultural rights which operate in devolved areas, including the right to health, the right to housing and the right to an adequate standard of living. This reform brings opportunities to embrace normative international standards that facilitate incorporation such as multi-institutional accountability, proportionality-inflected reasonableness review, dignity and collective justice, as well as substantive equality measures. Progress to date is examined against the risks posed to human rights by the erosion of devolution through a number of United Kingdom(UK)-led strategies, particularly in response to Brexit-related policy gaps. Although devolution can act as an important anchor on national reform, mitigating threats to backsliding on rights at the national level, increasing centralisation can make this difficult to realise in practice. The potential opportunities offered by enhanced devolution could provide a fully integrated human rights framework incorporating social and economic policy areas such as employment, social security, immigration and equality. However, given current constitutional arrangements, devolution’s promise as a force for human rights progress is limited. The article concludes with a reframing of human rights which reflects the more complex picture painted by diverging trajectories in each of the UK jurisdictions.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49150889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The law and practice of the Ireland–Northern Ireland Protocol","authors":"Gary Simpson","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1015","url":null,"abstract":"Book review of The Law and Practice of the Ireland–Northern Ireland Protocol, by Christopher McCrudden (ed).","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":"145 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135755398","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Clayton Ó Néill, A. Farrell, M. Donnelly, M. Tumelty
{"title":"Promoting solidarity in contested political spaces and public health emergencies: examining Covid-19 vaccination on the island of Ireland","authors":"Clayton Ó Néill, A. Farrell, M. Donnelly, M. Tumelty","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74iad1.1005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74iad1.1005","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines to what extent solidarity can be promoted in contested political spaces as part of mounting an effective response to public health emergencies. It examines the Covid-19 vaccination programmes in Ireland and Northern Ireland and identifies challenges in promoting solidarity in the island of Ireland. In these circumstances, it is suggested that a promising way forward in promoting solidaristic practices would encompass working from a baseline of shared health values, drawing upon (cross-border) institutional and jurisdictional support structures. Accordingly, building on a model set out by Prainsack and Buyx, we propose a tripartite solidarity framework which is not tiered or hierarchical in approach. Instead, it comprises three dimensions – jurisdictional, institutional and interpersonal – with shared health values operating as a centrifugal force.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42020964","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"From the Protocol to the Windsor Framework","authors":"Colin R G Murray, Niall Robb","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v73iad1.1081","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v73iad1.1081","url":null,"abstract":"The Windsor Framework, the new package of measures agreed by the United Kingdom (UK) and European Union (EU) as well as the new name for the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, was presented in February 2023 amidst considerable fanfare. This article examines the rationale for the new Framework amongst the negotiators and how some of its headline provisions impact upon those most exposed to the out-workings of any deal – those living and doing business in Northern Ireland. We investigate the possible implications for Northern Ireland of the new minimalist regulatory alignment in the trade in goods and the possibility of a ‘cooperation dividend’ stemming from warmer UK–EU relations. In particular, we examine the operation and possible limitations upon the ‘Stormont Brake’ mechanism. This article ultimately assesses whether Sunak’s Windsor Framework will be any more successful than the May Backstop and Johnson Protocol before it at ‘getting Brexit done’.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135337534","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}