Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
LAST UPDATE | 20 Dec 2023
IRELAND HAS DECIDED to initiate an inter-State case against the UK under the European Convention on Human Rights over the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023.
The act, which the state has previously voiced concern over to the United Kingdom, includes a form of limited immunity for some perpetrators of crimes committed during the conflict and would also prevent future civil cases and inquests into Troubles offences.
The decision, made by government today, was confirmed by Tánaiste Micheál Martin this afternoon.
In a statement Martin said: “This decision was taken after much thought and careful consideration. I regret that we find ourselves in a position where such a choice had to be made.
The Tánaiste said the decision by the British Government not to proceed with the 2014 Stormont House Agreement and instead pursue with the legislation, without consulting or engaging with “legitimate concerns” from the Republic of Ireland and others first, “left us with few options”.
“The British Government removed the political option, and has left us only this legal avenue,” he added.
In September, victims campaigner Raymond McCord also launched a legal challenge against the act at the High Court in Belfast.
McCord said he was seeking a judicial review of the act, arguing it is a breach of his human rights under the European Convention, relying on the same argument that the legislation is in breach of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
On the same day, victims and their families told The Journal that they found the legislation “disturbing” and “upsetting” and were fearful that justice will not be served.
Also in September, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar also appealed to the British Government not to enact Troubles Legacy Bill. At the time, the government were mulling over the decision to take legal action against the UK.
Last month, Micheál Martin – who is also Minister for Foreign Affairs – renewed the status of this decision, adding that Ireland was giving “serious consideration” to the idea that it would take legal action.
Today, it has been decided that the government will move forward will legal action.
Speaking on the decision today, the Tánaiste said: “The incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into Northern Ireland law is a specific and fundamental requirement of the Good Friday Agreement. Since the UK legislation was first tabled, the Government have been consistent that it is not compatible with the Convention.
“I used every opportunity to make my concerns known, and urged the British Government to pause this legislation.”
Martin said he personally has “consistently adopted” a victims-centred approach to the issue and that the state are “not alone” in their concerns.
Victims’ rights advocates in Ireland and the UK, politicians in both jurisdictions and the US President Joe Biden have all voiced concerns over the bill.
“Serious reservations about this legislation have also been raised by a number of international observers, including the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights,” he said.
“Most importantly, this legislation is opposed by people in Northern Ireland, especially the victims and families who will be most directly impacted by this Act.
“In particular, we have concerns around provisions which allow for the granting of immunity, and which shut down existing avenues to truth and justice for historic cases, including inquests, police investigations, Police Ombudsman investigations, and civil actions.
Earlier this year, the UK House of Lords supported an amendment setting out conditions for legal immunity as part of reconciliation efforts, including consent from the families of victims.
But British MPs later voted 288 to 205 – a majority of 83 – to reject this amendment. The legislation received a royal assent and became law later in September.
Martin said: “Even in cases in which immunity is not granted, ‘reviews’ by the proposed body, the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR) are not an adequate substitute for police investigations, carried out independently, adequately, and with sufficient participation of next of kin.”
“The British Government enacted this legislation on 18 September 2023, shutting off any possibility of political resolution,” Martin added
“We now find ourselves in a space where our only recourse is to pursue a legal path. It is important to leave the next steps to the Court.”
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar today said that the decision to take legal action on the United Kingdom’s legislation is “something we’re doing with a genuine sense of regret”.
Speaking to reporters in Dublin, Varadkar said: “We’d prefer not to be in this position. But we did make a commitment to survivors in Northern Ireland and to the families and victims, that we would stand by them. respect their wishes and also stand by the Good Friday agreements, which specifically references the European Convention of Human Rights.”
Varadkar added: “The UK government’s decided for their own reasons – and of course, they have the right to do that – to go down a different path, which was the UK legacy legislation, which is now law, but we don’t agree with that.”
“We think what was agreed by parties in Northern Ireland, the two governments, is the better approach.
“And we think at this stage, we really have no option but to ask the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg to carry out a judicial review of this legislation,” he added.
The SDLP were first to react to the announcement this afternoon, welcoming the decision by the Irish government.
SDLP Leader Colum Eastwood MP said: “No political party or institution on this island supports the British Government’s approach to addressing the legacy of the past.”
He said that the Conservative party government in the United Kingdom agreed to pass “the most extreme legislation that shuts down access to justice for victims and survivors”.
Eastwood agreed with the assertion that the British government has “undermined the international treaty” of the Stormont House Agreement and have “set themselves against the needs of victims and survivors”.
“The inter-state case being taken by the Irish Government is both welcome and utterly necessary,” he added.
Additional reporting by Jane Matthews
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I don’t think it’s ageist to suggest that a drivers reaction time and perception diminishes as they get older.
We expect young people to jump through a lot of hoops to be able to drive a car from theory tests, recorded lessons, driving test, L-plates, N-plates as well the financial barriers to even owning something NCT worthy. Is it so much to expect an older driver who went through none of that and now potentially has diminished senses to complete a simple refresher?
@Rochelle Hart: A car is not just a motor vehicle, it is a lethal weapon in the hands of the wrong person. I’ve worked as a professional driver all my working life . I did three tests…car, bus and HGV. As a professional driver you must do a day a year in the classroom to keep our CPC’s up to date it is a legal requirement. From what I have seen in my travels, its not the older experienced drivers that should be in the classroom every year , it’s the young inexperienced ones that need it most!!
@Ollie Fitzpatrick: Even the pros be knocking into folks too
@Rochelle Hart: absolutely ridiculous. Getting older gives one a better perception of safety and what I’m seeing is out there is dreadful and unsafe driving from younger people. Speed and lack of observation is deplorable. I had to do a driving test , I didn’t get it for free. My first weeks wage was on a driving lesson. So don’t judge all over 70s the same.
@Ollie Fitzpatrick: absolutely agree
@Ollie Fitzpatrick: how about both young and old then?
@Rochelle Hart: .
@Ollie Fitzpatrick: my father was about 70 when we took his keys away. He had almost killed us in a car crash! The car was written off. I damaged my shoulder and neck, my mother had a broken leg, the driver of the lorry had a broken clavicle and he walked away without a scratch. He never did a driving test in his life. His brother had gone to buy the licence and thought that as he was there he’d get one for my father too. That was how people got a driving licence back in the 40’s. So he was driving around with no testing at all. No rules of the road, just common sense and hope that he wouldn’t kill us all. But he almost did. So why not bring in testing for over 70’s? It would have weeded people like my father out and take them off the road.
@Marie McPhillips: if they are capable of driving then they should have no problem passing the test will they? I see mostly middle aged people being the danger on roads, had a woman today trying to pull infront of me before she got passed my car, she didnt even have her lights on, no indicator nothing just pulled over and nearly took the front off my car
@Rochelle Hart: plenty of people over 70 done lessons & a strict test Don’t know why people are on here looking to have them do a test as it not going to happen
And yet, many of the crashes are involving under 40s.
@Brian Keelty: Many?
@Kilkenny Proud: A third (33%) of fatalities were aged 35 years or younger, and almost a third (31%) of fatalities were aged 66+ years. The rest in between. 2022 statistics.
Source RSA
@Adrian Versey:
Some studies find an uptick in risk at 75+ and others only at 80+. In sum, “older drivers” in their 60′s are the safest drivers on the road. Older drivers up to 75 are only slightly riskier. It isn’t until age 75+ where a significant risk increase begins to appear and this made simply be a frailty effect.
@Adrian Versey: Has trouble understanding the written word this one.
@Adrian Versey: Thank you!
Over 70s are not causing accidents or vehicle deaths. EU needs to look closer at younger drivers.
@Marie McPhillips: can’t point the finger at all younger drivers (I presume you meant men)
Plenty of fantastic young drivers around. Ask a female young driver how to change a tire or add coolant and they will look at you with 10 heads, the interior mirror is not for beauty checkup checks
@Marie McPhillips: As always, the problem is how you get your data for a statistic and how they will be interpreted.
They have the same discussion in other European countries.
In Germany for example, same argument, elderly don’t cause THAT much accidents or fatal accidents.
Some experts than did argue, yes, but:
They drive only a fraction of the kilometres a non-retired driver is doing and usually avoid rush hours. Adjusted to this, Over 70′s were close the accident rate of younger drivers.
Let me put it this way: A driver doing +30k a year, mostly driving to work, rush hour, or even much more, has 2 accidents this year.
The elderly driver, 5k for shopping and leisure, also 2 accidents.
Would you consider both drivers are on the same level?
@alan scott:
@Wolfgang Bonow: not to many drivers over 70 doing 5 k are u for real they travel all over & good luck to them
They should teach transition year students the theory test and allow them to pass their driving test by the end of the leaving cert. I did my theory test when I was in transition year at my own expense and time. Passed driving test when I was 19. Motorway driving and night driving should also be taught too.
@alan scott: they? Who’s they, and who will pay them?
Time to leave the EU, elite club throwing its weight around too much
@Boris Blank: being in the EU has been a serious positive for ireland Boris Tom Peter what ever your name is
@michael odwyer: I think the Blank sums him up to a tee
@Boris Blank: Best wishes on your trip so Boris. Do you have anywhere in particular in mind that you are heading to, or will you just wander around for a bit?
@Boris Blank: Lol! The mighty Irish economy provides the world’s most comfortable safety net.
@Thesaltyurchin: our corporation tax is our safety net, nothing else, if a few multinationals decide to leave, our economy is banjaxed
@Boris Blank: I was trying to be as obvious as possible with my sarcasm. I have failed.
@Boris Blank: and I’m sure the multinationals who use funnel it’s EU profits through Ireland will gladly stay if we leave the EU right??
Well done Eileen…
@Clare Power: 100% Clare!!! Finally, a GOOD appointment by FAI…..standard of football being played is so much more free- flowing & ambitious than under the Pauw regime. Strange that you cannot comment in the ‘correct’ article but that’s the journal nowdays…..way more articles CLOSED to comment than open.
@Clare Power: Come on
@Larry Betts: wots up Larry pet have you run out of witty one liners!
Thats an absolute joke they are a danger on the roads, in overtaking labe doing 20 under and refuse to move, hitting cars trying to park and driving off, list goes on, if they cant pass a refresher then clearly they are not fit to drive if they do pass then they have nothing to worry about
The under 40 s are the problem not the elderly,main problem is speed .
My Aunt is 78 and her family won’t let her near a motorway, she just isn’t up to it. She just uses the car to tip to the shops and back about 5km.
You are not allowed to drive before you have proved you can competently do it.People of a certain age should be stopped from driving as they are a danger to themselves and others.Should be mandatory to do a refresher test.
The number of Irish people happy to star the disabled and elderly to death is astounding. Or it would be if you didn’t realise how.many of them have turned a blind eye to rape and murder for generations.
Elderly people that can’t drive most likely have no other way of shopping or accessing healthcare. None of you care one bit about the consequences of your twisted little fantasies. We have no viable public transport in 95% of the country.
Hells Angel 75+ on an E-Scooter, Make a hole for the new gang in town. No License required
Why not organise “refreshers” every 25 years and drop the ageism?
We’re not interested in autonomous vehicles yet? figures
@Thesaltyurchin: You haven’t heard about +2 Million recall from Tesla?
“figures” :-)
@Wolfgang Bonow: That’s just to fix some bugs, still works and will become the norm as Ai advances… no brainer in this situation.
@Thesaltyurchin: they’re right up there with unicorns on the list of things which don’t exist.
@Chris O’Brien: this is the way
Because there’s no options. And starving the elderly and disabled is still frowned on in Ireland. Though give it 6 months.
@Gerry Lamont: you’re proposing starving the elderly… I know it’s Ireland and attacking the weak is popular, but maybe say that to your friends in private, instead of telling the whole world your homicidal fantasies.
First of all what will be the refresher? Will it be a theory test to update elderly people in rules of the road or it will be a fresh full driving test?
After one year of passing driving test most of the drivers will fail they driving test as they already have some habits.
In my opinion people over certain age should have they vision checked on a yearly basis and that’s it.
If elderly people have to do it, why not to force a refresher after 2 or 5 years after passing the driving test for everyone?! The ones which will fail have to go for 20-30 hours with driving school before they could reapply the test.
The other thing…even you have passed your driving test it doesn’t mean you can drive a car. You have basic information which have to be improved with experience you’re gaining on the roads.
have your say