The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission is facing a crisis that will only be overcome if it receives wholehearted support from the government and changes its own methods of operation, according to an independent report. Carol Coulter, Legal Affairs Correspondent, reports.
The report was written by Prof Stephen Livingstone and Dr Rachel Murray, of Queen's University Belfast and the University of Bristol respectively, in a project funded by the Nuffield Foundation. Prof Livingstone disappeared off the Antrim coast in March 2004 and is now presumed dead.
The NIHRC is one of the institutions set up under the Good Friday Agreement. The establishment of a Human Rights Commission in the Republic was also part of the agreement, and this is now under the chairmanship of Dr Maurice Manning. A joint committee of the two commissions was also provided for by the agreement, although this has been slow to get off the ground.
However, the NIHRC has been riven by internal division, and six of its original members have resigned in the past two years. Its chief commissioner, Prof Brice Dickson, is completing his contract this year, and his post has been advertised, but not filled.
The Livingstone-Murray report says that the NIHRC has "demonstrated significant industry and can claim some successes. However, these are overshadowed by its problems.
"Any human rights commission in Northern Ireland would have faced significant problems," it states. "However, the NIHRC has not responded well to these challenges.
"Its failure to develop a clear strategy and a unified commission has undermined its ability to act effectively as regards the promotion and protection of human rights for all."
One of the tasks given to the NIHRC was that of drawing up recommendations for a bill of rights for Northern Ireland.
"Nothing demonstrates the combination of external and internal problems more clearly than the bill of rights process," the report comments. "Arguably this was too big a project to give to a commission which already had a number of other difficult tasks, and the NIHRC was certainly inadequately resourced for the type of bill of rights process that may be envisaged."
The report points out that differences over the bill of rights led to a number of the resignations. Nonetheless, it comments, "those remaining on the Commission have still to produce a draft Bill, let alone marshal support for its acceptance."
The report is also highly critical of the British government, which, it says, failed to support and resource the commission adequately. For the future, it should ensure adequate funding and a transparent appointments process, provide the commission with adequate powers and ensure effective engagement with it.
The commission needs to develop a clear strategy and vision, and unite the commissioners, it says. It also needs to engage with all the political parties and be part of the political process as a whole, while retaining its independence of both government and NGOs.
The report was written after extensive research into other human rights commissions, including the South African one, and more than 100 interviews.
It drew up a number of benchmarks for effectiveness of HRCs, which Dr Murray said were also applicable to proposed commissions in Scotland and Britain, and to the existing one in Ireland.
These benchmarks concern the conditions under which a commission is created, including its degree of independence and resources; its performance within these parameters, including its strategic plan and ability to deal with crises; and its legitimacy in the eyes of those with whom it deals.
Prof Dickson welcomed the report and pointed out that the NIHRC had fully co-operated with it. He added that he did not agree with some of its conclusions, but said that the NIHRC would be studying its recommendations closely.