Pub Date : 2023-09-04DOI: 10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1096
Duncan Sheehan
The article examines an innovative suggested rationale for change of position – namely that the claimant has ‘outcome responsibility’ for the defendant’s change of position. It concludes that the justification fails. Although it purports to justify a single baseline against which to judge if the defendant’s position has changed, it – at best – only justifies a subset of the cases in which change of position is normatively attractive; it does not justify the defence in (say) cases of innocent wrongdoing. As such it requires us to accept that there are several different species of defence. An easier route to justifying the availability of the defence in all these different cases is ‘irreversible detriment’, although that explanation still has to justify why the defendant should not be worse off.
{"title":"The scope and rationale(s) of the change of position defence","authors":"Duncan Sheehan","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1096","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1096","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines an innovative suggested rationale for change of position – namely that the claimant has ‘outcome responsibility’ for the defendant’s change of position. It concludes that the justification fails. Although it purports to justify a single baseline against which to judge if the defendant’s position has changed, it – at best – only justifies a subset of the cases in which change of position is normatively attractive; it does not justify the defence in (say) cases of innocent wrongdoing. As such it requires us to accept that there are several different species of defence. An easier route to justifying the availability of the defence in all these different cases is ‘irreversible detriment’, although that explanation still has to justify why the defendant should not be worse off.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":"159 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135451537","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-04DOI: 10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1094
Heather Conway
While emergency measures for tackling coronavirus fundamentally altered our daily lives, this limiting of freedoms on public health grounds had an equally dramatic impact on the rituals of death. The sweeping restrictions imposed on the time-honoured social practice of the funeral recast its fundamentals but have not been meaningfully probed in legal scholarship. This article addresses that lacuna by examining the relevant laws and government guidance and their broader societal impact. Drawing on the multidisciplinary field of death studies, it examines both the transformative effect of these measures on funerals and the attendant human and social consequences. Integrating this analysis with evidence from emerging research on bereavement and grief during the pandemic, the article argues that the ongoing emotional toll of Covid-era funerals is fuelling a new type of public health crisis.
{"title":"Death rites disrupted: coronavirus, ‘lockdown’ laws and the altered social ritual of the funeral","authors":"Heather Conway","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1094","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1094","url":null,"abstract":"While emergency measures for tackling coronavirus fundamentally altered our daily lives, this limiting of freedoms on public health grounds had an equally dramatic impact on the rituals of death. The sweeping restrictions imposed on the time-honoured social practice of the funeral recast its fundamentals but have not been meaningfully probed in legal scholarship. This article addresses that lacuna by examining the relevant laws and government guidance and their broader societal impact. Drawing on the multidisciplinary field of death studies, it examines both the transformative effect of these measures on funerals and the attendant human and social consequences. Integrating this analysis with evidence from emerging research on bereavement and grief during the pandemic, the article argues that the ongoing emotional toll of Covid-era funerals is fuelling a new type of public health crisis.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47441718","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-04DOI: 10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1100
C R G Murray, Niall Robb
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’.
{"title":"From the Protocol to the Windsor Framework","authors":"C R G Murray, Niall Robb","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1100","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":"77 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135403034","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-04DOI: 10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1064
John Taggart
In the case of R v Phair, the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal was tasked with interpreting the scope and application of the comparatively recent criminal defence of ‘duress of circumstances’. While the defence of duress by threats is well established, duress of circumstances has received comparatively little judicial or academic attention. The judgment provides important clarification on the doctrinal and theoretical underpinnings of the defence. Further, the decision is instructive as to how courts should approach the limitation of ‘voluntary association’ which may operate to prevent a defendant successfully pleading the defence.
{"title":"‘Duress of circumstances and voluntary association’: R v Phair [2022] NICA 66","authors":"John Taggart","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1064","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1064","url":null,"abstract":"In the case of R v Phair, the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal was tasked with interpreting the scope and application of the comparatively recent criminal defence of ‘duress of circumstances’. While the defence of duress by threats is well established, duress of circumstances has received comparatively little judicial or academic attention. The judgment provides important clarification on the doctrinal and theoretical underpinnings of the defence. Further, the decision is instructive as to how courts should approach the limitation of ‘voluntary association’ which may operate to prevent a defendant successfully pleading the defence.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46977017","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-04DOI: 10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1034
Cian Ó Concubhair
Legal protection for confidential journalist sources has often been a site of tension and dispute between journalists, the police and the courts. Journalists routinely claim that freedom of expression guarantees provided for under international and domestic human rights instruments include a legal privilege against disclosure of confidential journalist sources. This claim is often raised to resist compelled disclosure of journalistic materials to police as part of criminal investigations. Courts in many jurisdictions have forcefully repudiated this legal claim, though many recognise some right for journalists to refuse disclosure. Some courts have reluctantly conceded to the naming of this right as ‘journalistic privilege’. In 2020, courts on both sides of the Irish border were called upon to vindicate this right against disclosure. This recent flurry of litigation has, in the Republic of Ireland, built upon more than a decade of significant legal developments around ‘journalistic privilege’. These latter developments have dramatically expanded the scope of the Irish Constitution’s freedom of expression guarantees. This article critically reviews this last decade of significant legal developments around ‘journalistic privilege’ in the Republic of Ireland. It examines the two recent and highly significant Irish determinations from 2020 in Fine Point Films and Corcoran, and how the former Northern Irish judgment has created significant new avenues for legal development in the Republic of Ireland. The article also identifies and considers some important, emergent themes in Strasbourg’s article 10 jurisprudence: specifically an apparent new ‘source motive’ test for article 10 protection of confidential source material.
对秘密记者消息来源的法律保护往往是记者、警察和法院之间紧张和争议的一个问题。记者经常声称，国际和国内人权文书所规定的言论自由保障包括不泄露记者机密消息来源的法律特权。这一主张通常是为了抵制在刑事调查中向警方强制披露新闻材料而提出的。尽管许多司法管辖区的法院承认记者有拒绝披露信息的权利，但仍有力地否认了这一法律主张。一些法院不情愿地将这一权利命名为“新闻特权”。2020年，爱尔兰边境两侧的法院都被要求维护这一权利，反对信息披露。在爱尔兰共和国，最近的一系列诉讼建立在十多年来围绕“新闻特权”的重大法律发展的基础上。后一种事态发展极大地扩大了《爱尔兰宪法》保障言论自由的范围。这篇文章批判性地回顾了过去十年在爱尔兰共和国围绕“新闻特权”的重大法律发展。它考察了Fine Point Films和Corcoran从2020年开始的两个最近且非常重要的爱尔兰决定，以及前北爱尔兰判决如何为爱尔兰共和国的法律发展创造了重要的新途径。本文还确定并考虑了斯特拉斯堡第10条判例中一些重要的、新出现的主题:特别是第10条保护机密原始材料的一个明显的新“来源动机”检验。
{"title":"Journalistic privilege in Ireland","authors":"Cian Ó Concubhair","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1034","url":null,"abstract":"Legal protection for confidential journalist sources has often been a site of tension and dispute between journalists, the police and the courts. Journalists routinely claim that freedom of expression guarantees provided for under international and domestic human rights instruments include a legal privilege against disclosure of confidential journalist sources. This claim is often raised to resist compelled disclosure of journalistic materials to police as part of criminal investigations. Courts in many jurisdictions have forcefully repudiated this legal claim, though many recognise some right for journalists to refuse disclosure. Some courts have reluctantly conceded to the naming of this right as ‘journalistic privilege’. In 2020, courts on both sides of the Irish border were called upon to vindicate this right against disclosure. This recent flurry of litigation has, in the Republic of Ireland, built upon more than a decade of significant legal developments around ‘journalistic privilege’. These latter developments have dramatically expanded the scope of the Irish Constitution’s freedom of expression guarantees. This article critically reviews this last decade of significant legal developments around ‘journalistic privilege’ in the Republic of Ireland. It examines the two recent and highly significant Irish determinations from 2020 in Fine Point Films and Corcoran, and how the former Northern Irish judgment has created significant new avenues for legal development in the Republic of Ireland. The article also identifies and considers some important, emergent themes in Strasbourg’s article 10 jurisprudence: specifically an apparent new ‘source motive’ test for article 10 protection of confidential source material.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135451538","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-04DOI: 10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1097
Dean Taylor
This article analyses recent English decisions reviving the need to consider the lease/licence dichotomy and conclusiveness of the parties’ agreement in the new context of property guardianship as an alternative to private renting. It argues that context has proved instructive in interpreting the parties’ agreement elsewhere in the case law and offers a way forward in the hard cases amid the ongoing search for doctrinal clarity and justification. A compound subjective–objective approach appreciates the underlying purpose of the parties’ relationship and justifies why no intention to grant the right of exclusive possession can be present, thereby precluding a tenancy. The article briefly considers reforms to rental accommodation previously suggested by the Law Commission and, in light of the continued need to prove the status of lessee, argues that they should be revisited in order to protect those living in temporary accommodation.
{"title":"Property guardians: reigniting the lease/licence battle?","authors":"Dean Taylor","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1097","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1097","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses recent English decisions reviving the need to consider the lease/licence dichotomy and conclusiveness of the parties’ agreement in the new context of property guardianship as an alternative to private renting. It argues that context has proved instructive in interpreting the parties’ agreement elsewhere in the case law and offers a way forward in the hard cases amid the ongoing search for doctrinal clarity and justification. A compound subjective–objective approach appreciates the underlying purpose of the parties’ relationship and justifies why no intention to grant the right of exclusive possession can be present, thereby precluding a tenancy. The article briefly considers reforms to rental accommodation previously suggested by the Law Commission and, in light of the continued need to prove the status of lessee, argues that they should be revisited in order to protect those living in temporary accommodation.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":"92 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135403033","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-04DOI: 10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1099
Ivanka Antova
The emergency legal and policy responses to COVID-19 attempt to avoid discrimination against disabled people. But they do not address deeper ableist and disableist narratives and practices embedded in emergency health policy. Adopting a disability ethics approach to the guidelines that emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic shows that they rest on dubious ethical grounds. However, emergency legal and policy responses to COVID-19 can be improved by adopting an approach based on disability ethics principles that emerge from grassroots level.
{"title":"Disability and COVID-19: improving legal and policy responses through grassroots disability ethics","authors":"Ivanka Antova","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1099","url":null,"abstract":"The emergency legal and policy responses to COVID-19 attempt to avoid discrimination against disabled people. But they do not address deeper ableist and disableist narratives and practices embedded in emergency health policy. Adopting a disability ethics approach to the guidelines that emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic shows that they rest on dubious ethical grounds. However, emergency legal and policy responses to COVID-19 can be improved by adopting an approach based on disability ethics principles that emerge from grassroots level.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":"2013 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135402720","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-04DOI: 10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1098
Thomas Mohr
George Gavan Duffy (1882–1951) was a signatory of the 1921 ‘Anglo Irish Treaty’. In the 1930s he enjoyed a notable judicial career and would rise to the position of President of the High Court of Ireland. This article examines a more neglected period of Gavan Duffy’s career. It focuses on his brief parliamentary career as a TD in the early 1920s and, in particular, his involvement in the creation of the Constitution of the Irish Free State. This analysis also examines the reasons for the divergence of Gavan Duffy’s position from that held by other signatories and supporters of the 1921 Treaty. By late 1922 Gavan Duffy had emerged as a determined critic of the Provisional Government and of the draft Constitution of the Irish Free State that emerged from negotiations in London. This analysis focuses on Gavan Duffy’s attempts to amend provisions of the draft Constitution that he believed went further than the strict legal demands of the 1921 Treaty. The conclusion assesses Gavan Duffy’s attitude towards the legal consequences of the 1921 Treaty and his attempts to mitigate their impact on the 1922 Constitution of the Irish Free State.
{"title":"George Gavan Duffy and the legal consequences of the Anglo Irish Treaty, 1921–1923","authors":"Thomas Mohr","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1098","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i2.1098","url":null,"abstract":"George Gavan Duffy (1882–1951) was a signatory of the 1921 ‘Anglo Irish Treaty’. In the 1930s he enjoyed a notable judicial career and would rise to the position of President of the High Court of Ireland. This article examines a more neglected period of Gavan Duffy’s career. It focuses on his brief parliamentary career as a TD in the early 1920s and, in particular, his involvement in the creation of the Constitution of the Irish Free State. This analysis also examines the reasons for the divergence of Gavan Duffy’s position from that held by other signatories and supporters of the 1921 Treaty. By late 1922 Gavan Duffy had emerged as a determined critic of the Provisional Government and of the draft Constitution of the Irish Free State that emerged from negotiations in London. This analysis focuses on Gavan Duffy’s attempts to amend provisions of the draft Constitution that he believed went further than the strict legal demands of the 1921 Treaty. The conclusion assesses Gavan Duffy’s attitude towards the legal consequences of the 1921 Treaty and his attempts to mitigate their impact on the 1922 Constitution of the Irish Free State.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135403035","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}
Pub Date : 2023-08-24DOI: 10.53386/nilq.v74iad1.1026
Laura Cahillane, D. Kenny
The ‘Golfgate’ controversy of 2020 caused significant public anger, led to resignations of a number of high-profile figures, and caused questions to be asked about political culture and elitism in Ireland. A more unexpected consequence of this episode was that it exposed the serious inadequacies in the process of appointing judges in Ireland. Scrutiny of the manner in which Judge Seamus Woulfe was appointed to the Supreme Court revealed worrying inconsistencies and a serious lack of transparency in the process. While legislative reform is forthcoming to reform this process, it is not clear that the failings highlighted by this episode will be rectified in this process. This article examines Ireland’s appointment process in light of the Woulfe controversy and assesses the proposed reforms currently before the Oireachtas, on their adequacy to address these problems.
{"title":"The Seamus Woulfe controversy and the deficiencies in Ireland's judicial appointments process","authors":"Laura Cahillane, D. Kenny","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74iad1.1026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74iad1.1026","url":null,"abstract":"The ‘Golfgate’ controversy of 2020 caused significant public anger, led to resignations of a number of high-profile figures, and caused questions to be asked about political culture and elitism in Ireland. A more unexpected consequence of this episode was that it exposed the serious inadequacies in the process of appointing judges in Ireland. Scrutiny of the manner in which Judge Seamus Woulfe was appointed to the Supreme Court revealed worrying inconsistencies and a serious lack of transparency in the process. While legislative reform is forthcoming to reform this process, it is not clear that the failings highlighted by this episode will be rectified in this process. This article examines Ireland’s appointment process in light of the Woulfe controversy and assesses the proposed reforms currently before the Oireachtas, on their adequacy to address these problems.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48111277","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}
Pub Date : 2023-07-27DOI: 10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1020
Hayley Roberts, Huw Pritchard
This article is one of the first of its kind to undertake empirical research into the engagement of a devolved government in a United Nations (UN) human rights treaty-monitoring process. There is a lack of studies on this topic, even though the devolved nations of the United Kingdom (UK) have legislative competence and responsibilities to implement many obligations arising from several international human rights treaties, such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The article provides a case study to evaluate and compare how regional governments are accommodated in the treaty body system so that future monitoring processes accurately reflect the differences in implementation of UN treaties, or lack thereof, across different regions within the state. The potential impact of ‘under-representative’ state reporting is also examined. The article highlights that State Reports and the monitoring process should ensure accurate and reliable information on implementation in each nation of the UK and, more specifically, should ensure that the state delegation is composed of a balanced number of representatives from each nation, that delegation responses to questions from the Committee on the Rights of the Child clearly indicate whether the reply relates to law, policy and practice in the UK as a whole or solely to a specific nation, and that delegation representatives have a full understanding of the division of responsibilities between the UK Government and the devolved governments.
{"title":"Challenges for human rights treaty monitoring in a devolved UK: a case study","authors":"Hayley Roberts, Huw Pritchard","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v74i1.1020","url":null,"abstract":"This article is one of the first of its kind to undertake empirical research into the engagement of a devolved government in a United Nations (UN) human rights treaty-monitoring process. There is a lack of studies on this topic, even though the devolved nations of the United Kingdom (UK) have legislative competence and responsibilities to implement many obligations arising from several international human rights treaties, such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The article provides a case study to evaluate and compare how regional governments are accommodated in the treaty body system so that future monitoring processes accurately reflect the differences in implementation of UN treaties, or lack thereof, across different regions within the state. The potential impact of ‘under-representative’ state reporting is also examined. The article highlights that State Reports and the monitoring process should ensure accurate and reliable information on implementation in each nation of the UK and, more specifically, should ensure that the state delegation is composed of a balanced number of representatives from each nation, that delegation responses to questions from the Committee on the Rights of the Child clearly indicate whether the reply relates to law, policy and practice in the UK as a whole or solely to a specific nation, and that delegation representatives have a full understanding of the division of responsibilities between the UK Government and the devolved governments.","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":"47830417","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}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：