Unionism and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission 1999–2005: Hostility, Hubris and Hesitancy

Munce, Peter

doi:10.1080/07907184.2012.708656

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…74 A similar position was adopted by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission after its creation in 1999. 75 Unionists suffered more from the violence of paramilitary actors than from violence committed by State actors, and they interpreted the decision of CAJ and other human rights actors not to monitor paramilitary violence as an indicator that they were biased and aligned to Nationalism. 76 This position was reinforced by viewing the position of human rights actors alongside Sinn Féin's longstanding position 'that only the state and state agencies may commit human rights violations while actions by non-state actors are a matter for criminal law to deal with'.…”

Section: Communal Narratives Of the Causes Of And Responsibilities Fomentioning

confidence: 99%

Metaconflict and international human rights law in dealing with Northern Ireland's past

Mallinder¹

2019

CILJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many post-conflict societies, political actors battle to ensure the dominancy of their preferred narratives regarding the causes of and responsibilities for past violence. They wage these conflicts about the conflict to instrumentalise narratives of the past to serve their contemporary political aims, but in doing so, they contribute to the endurance of societal divisions which can have destructive effects on the promotion of reconciliation and political stability. Metaconflicts can be particularly heated with respect to the design and implementation of measures to deliver victims' rights to truth, justice and reparations, as it is through these processes that competing and complex communal narratives of the past are exposed and challenged. This article interrogates how metaconflicts shape political actors' engagement with or resistance to international legal obligations to investigate and prosecute past violations. The approaches of Northern Ireland's Unionist political parties and Unionist-aligned organisations to the United Kingdom's obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights are used as a case study. Through theoretically informed qualitative analysis of publicly available submissions made by these groups to an official consultation and parliamentary inquiries taking place during 2018, this article identifies four strategies used by Unionists to resist approaches to dealing with the past that they view as contrary to their interests. On this basis, the article argues that these actors understand law as a means to construct and provide official recognition for communally resonant moral and social categories and norms, and that, as such, legal principles such as the equality of the law, nondiscrimination and independence within the criminal justice process are viewed as secondary to political concerns. It concludes that reducing the metaconflict's destructive effects requires all parties to recognise the need for political generosity and compromise and to develop more substantive engagement with the principles of universality and equality underpinning international human rights law.

show abstract

Section: Communal Narratives Of the Causes Of And Responsibilities Fomentioning

confidence: 99%

Metaconflict and international human rights law in dealing with Northern Ireland's past

Mallinder¹

2019

CILJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Unionism and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission 1999–2005: Hostility, Hubris and Hesitancy

Cited by 1 publication

References 18 publications

Metaconflict and international human rights law in dealing with Northern Ireland's past

Metaconflict and international human rights law in dealing with Northern Ireland's past

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About