Clause 7 - Guidance for criminal justice organisations on human rights standards
Justice (Northern Ireland) Bill [Lords]
10:30 am
Mr Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 58, in
clause 7, page 4, line 30, leave out 'international'.
The clause provides for guidance for criminal justice organisations on human rights standards. I want to make it clear that I have nothing against providing such advice to such organisations. It is clear, from reading the clause, that the Human Rights Act 1998 has a particular role to play. However, it is bizarre that subsection (1) provides that when the Attorney-General for Northern Ireland issues the guidelines, the organisations' functions should be
''in a manner consistent with international human rights standards relevant to the criminal justice system.''
I have simply no idea what such standards may be. They are infinitely flexible, they may change, and they are not subject to any legislation passed by this Parliament: they are meaningless. The human rights standards that this Parliament has chosen to apply, before the incorporation of the Human Rights Act, could be referred to by reference to the human rights convention, to which we are a signatory, and must now be derived from the Act. I would hope that the Human Rights Act is seen to be compatible with nebulous international human rights standards. However, the insertion of the word ''international'' is meaningless. It is gobbledegook. That gobbledegook is emphasised in subsection (2), which states:
''In the exercise of its functions, such an organisation shall have regard to any guidance for the time being in operation under this section; but this does not affect the operation, in relation to any such organisation, of section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (c. 42) (public authority not to act in a way incompatible with a Convention right).''
So there we have it. Under the subsection, an international human rights standard would have to be disregarded if it was not compatible with section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998, which is part of our law.
I do not know why the word ''international'' has been used, but I hope never to see it in a document of this sort again, because it is appalling drafting. I have no idea where it came from. I suspect that the right hon. Member for Upper Bann will say that this is the incorporation of yet another nebulous concept into a piece of legislation as a result of some sideline agreement between the Government and the SDLP or some other party to previous political discussions. I do not know, but whatever its origin, it should not be included in the clause.
The Minister will have to provide me with persuasive justification for the use of the word ''international''. I do not believe that he can, and I certainly intend to press for its deletion.