Court of Appeal upholds Administration of Justice (Language) Act of 1737
As the BBC notes the Court of Appeal has rejected a legal action claiming that the Administration of Justice (Language) Act of 1737, which specifies that all proceedings in NI courts must be in English, was discriminatory and breached the European Convention on Human Rights.
And UTV has extensive quotes from the ruling
Lord Justice Girvan ruled: “Conferring on individual litigants a right at their option to convert court forms from English into a language not understood by the vast majority of intended recipients would frustrate the interests of justices.
“While it will always be the case that in a pluralist society such as Northern Ireland there will be some people who may not understand English or would prefer to speak another language this cannot entitle them to require prescribed forms and applications to the court intended to inform the court and the other parties to be translated into their own preferred language which is not readily comprehensible to the intended recipients.” [added emphasis]
………
Lord Justice Girvan, sitting with Lord Chief Justice Sir Declan Morgan and Lord Justice Coghlin, said the Act had not been shown to be incompatible with any of Mr Cathain’s Convention rights.
“Although he acknowledged the requirements did treat English speakers differently from non-English speakers, the judge held this was “manifestly necessary and proportionate in a democratic society“.
He said: “In a jurisdiction where English is the language of the overwhelming majority of the population the requirement that court documents initiating proceedings be in English as the working language of the court is a practical necessity in the interests of fairness.” [added emphasis]
Lord Justice Girvan stressed that non-English speaking witnesses in proceedings must be entitled to give evidence in their own language through a translator – otherwise their right to access to the courts would be “illusory”.
However, he emphasised the present position that English is the working language of not just the courts but nearly the entire population.
“Even if Article 6 and 14 (of the European Convention on Human Rights) were engaged in this case no breach of the appellant’s Convention rights has in fact occurred,” he said.
“The appellant has not demonstrated any Convention incompatibility in the 1737 Act“.
Lord Justice Girvan added: “At common law English is the working language of the court and this will remain so unless and until the matter is changed by statute“.
“Any change in law would itself have to be compatible with the Convention rights of litigants.”
Topic: Government
Region: Northern Ireland
Danny
“The language shift which was engineered in Ireland…”
….was hugely successful because the Irish actually preferred English?
Isn’t it great that so many people are so interested in the cause of the Irish language and language politics.
However the focus should be on the issue at hand – why is the British Government and the Northern Ireland Executive (including SF) happy to allow a situation to pertain in which citizens of the UK in Northern Ireland are less than equal with citizens of the UK in Scotland and Wales?
Are they really worried that there will be a sudden flood of Irish speakers litigating in the courts should the 1737 penal legislation be repealed? Or is it just that they have a particular mental block regarding Irish?
What does the new Justice Minister, David Forde, think about a penal law, which discriminates against Northern Irish people, being still on the statute books here – and not in other parts of the UK?
Why aren’t the unionist parties up in arms over this this diminution of the union? In fact they seem to be in support of it – some unionists!
Well for starters, there are a certain bunch of people who very much enjoy participating in terrorism etc. We call them the dissidents. These same people are finding themselves in court more and more often. Terrorism cases (ie: murder and explosives etc) are very technical when it comes to the forensic and legal end of things.
I for one would expect that these are the kind of people who would insist on creating as much expense and effort as possible for the state when taking these prosecutions. They would insist on trials in Irish.
There are plenty of other people, ordinary criminals who would insist on Irish simply as a stalling tactic, or just to be obstructive.
I would like someone to explain to me, how it serves the cause of justice, to make complicated legal proceeding, even more complicated (and legally hazardous) and expensive by insisting that the proceedings be held in a language that is not the primary language of ANYBODY in that court-room?
It makes no sense. The only reason anybody at this time would want Irish used in a courtroom, is to obfuscate matters, to stall, to delay, to make a political point, to place more financial burden on the state, to exclude non-Irish speakers (and we all know what section of society that will be) and to create divisions.
If you really want Irish to become the everyday language of the people, then the court is not the place to start. Start with the people first, schools, public places, menus, place names, public signs etc. Teach people Irish, make it attractive, don’t shove it down their throats.
I would be open to the idea that someone could have their case in court heard in Irish, if they were prepared to foot the bill themselves.
bigchiefally,
I never said Ireland would be better off or not. But an Irish speaking Ireland seems quite natural and reasonable to me. How many European countries are predominantly English speaking? Ireland is the exception, rather than the rule. Like I said, an Irish speaking Ireland was never in the interests of the British, and they did language shift like no other.
Yes, English has been very beneficial to Ireland as a country. Why, look at how successful Ireland has been over the last century or two. Very little poverty, low emigration rates, successful economy, no civil wars etc. Imagine if it had remained largely Irish speaking. Horrors! Thank God for English. One only has to look at countries like Sweden or Finland or the Netherlands which never made the switch to English (it’s more useful, ya know) to see what hellish conditions would have awaited the Irish had they not adopted the language of their rulers in London and Dublin. And what use is Polish? Why won’t those pesky Poles just switch to Russian or English? They are most useful, after all.
Glencoppagagh,
Idiotic statement. English was the language of advancement because there was no alternative. To remain an Irish monoglot after 1700 or so was to remain shut out from most opportunities for advancement in your own country. It wasn’t a matter of people ‘preferring English’. It was about survival and getting on. People typically don’t abandon their native tongue, especially when they are in the majority. But that’s what happened. When the choice was between retaining Irish and putting food on the table, becoming literate, gaining a better job etc, the language almost always came second, and rightly so. The language shift happened and there’s no going back, but let’s not try and portray it as ‘free choice’. For most, it wasn’t. The National Schools system established in 1831 (even in overwhelmingly Irish speaking districts) was also very effective.
“For can the swoord teache thim to speake Englishe, to use Englishe apparell, to restrayne them from Irishe exaccions and extorcions, and to shonne all the manners & orders of the Irishe? Noe it is the rodd of justice that muste scower out those blottes…justice without the sword may suffize to call all those to her presence…to defende the Englishe from all Irishe spottes, to settel thim in the quiett estate they were in before they so degenerated…”
- Lord Chancellor Gerrard to the Privy Council, 1577
“It is not in the interests of our community for Irish (which our ancestors shunned as they would rocky crags) to be spoken widely and freely.”
- Dubliner Richard Stanihurst, 1587
“We may conceive and hope that the next generation will in tongue and heart and every way else become English; so as there will be no difference or distinction but the Irish sea betwixt us.”
- Sir John Davies, ‘A Discovery of the True Causes Why Ireland Was Never Entirely Subdued’, 1612
“..it hath ever beene the use of the Conquerour, to despise the language of the conquered and to force him by all meanes to learne his.”
- Edmund Spenser, A View of the State of Ireland, Published 1633
“It would be a noble achievement to abolish the Irish language in this kingdom, so far at least as to oblige all the natives to speak only English on every occasion of business, in shops, markets, fairs, and other places of dealing…”
- Jonathan Swift, ‘Two Letters On Subjects Relative To the Improvement of Ireland’ in Ireland in the days of Dean Swift, 1727
“The common Irish are naturally shrewd, but very ignorant and deficient in mental culture; from the barbarous tongue in which they converse which operates as an effectual bar to any literary attainment.”
- William Shaw Mason, Royal Irish Academy, 1822
Tá mo chroí-se réabtha ina míle céad cuid
‘s gan balsam féin ann a d’fhóirfeadh dom phian,
nuair a chluinim an Ghaeilge uilig á tréigbheáil,
is caismirt Bhéarla i mbeol gach aoin,”
Trans:
“My heart is torn in a hundred thousand pieces,
And no remedy will soothe my pain,
When I hear Irish being abandoned
And the din of English in everyone’s mouth.”
- Art Mac Cubhthaigh, Armagh, 1715-1773
In the south, where you can be tried in Irish, with no less inconvenience to the judges etc, there is no evidence that dissidents have tried that trick, Old Sod. So it seems to me that you’re making a petty sectarian point with no evidence to back it up except your own narrow prejudices.
Danny – you are honestly saying that having an English speaking workforce isnt an advantage in the modern world?
The Dutch and Scandanavians are successful, no doubt, but they all put a huge amount of effort into their English education too, which we essentially get for free.
Was there a language here before Irish speakers arrived? If so should we all go back to this language?
What about the language one before that one?
Should the English go back to what they were speaking before the Norman invasion?
Where does it stop?
Keep alive old languages for cultural benefit if you wish, thats great, but the world moves on and linguistically we just happen to be speaking what is almost the common language of the world. I really dont see how this is not a good thing.
I hardly think it would be the same “Political point” in the REPUBLIC.
For the record, I’m Irish and I think you owe me an apology for calling me sectarian when you insist on calling a sovereign state “the south” as opposed to its proper name.
Just because someone does not agree with you and your motivations, does not equate them to being sectarian.
Especially when I suggest that Irish should be promoted in many other ways FIRST.
Tell me, just how many trials are heard in Irish in the republic? I doubt it would be many and if so, then it’s hardly going to be much of a burden on the state, especially a state that has Irish as the primary language in it’s constitution and which has the civil service and bureaucracy to support the use of Irish in an official capacity.
Northern Ireland would be a very different matter, as it would be a political statement for many. People will resent it as much as others will use it for their own “point scoring”.
Northern Ireland does not have a bureaucracy or civil service that can work with Irish,…. maybe that will change in 20 years through natural change, but to accommodate it now, today, would mean much change, much spending and resistance.
At this time, the legal/ official use of Irish in courtrooms, is unnecessary and divisive.
bigchiefally,
Would you stop putting words in my mouth! I never said having an English speaking workforce wouldn’t be an advantage. My primary point is that
a) the language shift was engineered and resulted largely from coercion. It was not a ‘free choice’ or because English was ‘better’. English used to be the poor relation in Ireland. It was confined to a handful of areas. The roles eventually reversed.
b) Ireland could have succeeded had it remained largely Irish speaking. Just as the bulk of the population in modern day Sweden has remained Swedish speaking, for example. Ireland didn’t need English to ‘succeed’. It’s a moot point now but I’m looking at the time before the language shift occurred. What caused the language to decline from a high of 4 million native speakers to about 40,000 in just a few generations? That’s not natural. There were many more Irish speakers in the country than English speakers at the time, yet it still happened. Why? Historically speaking, it’s a fascinating question IMHO.
I’m still not entirely sure what great benefits have come to Ireland because it’s mainly English speaking. What benefits have come to Ireland for being English speaking that haven’t come to Sweden or Germany, where they speak languages other than English? Having English as a home language isn’t a prerequisite for success, is what I’m saying. Having English didn’t stop most of Ireland from being poverty stricken, with massive emigration, for example. I suppose having English allowed those hundreds of thousands of Irish to integrate better in England, the US, Canada and Australia.
This isn’t or shouldn’t be a debate about whether or not Irish language policy has been a success in the south/Republic if old sod insists. It’s about whether or not the British Government wants to treat one part of the UK differently to other parts. It’s about whether the NI Executive and other local parties are prepared to accept this if it’s the case, as I argue.
Northern Ireland is clearly a place apart.
The arguments being used in favour of the Act today….”In a jurisdiction where English is the language of the overwhelming majority of the population…” obviously didn’t come into it in the 1730s. As another user said, it was about suppressing Irish and extending English. Large swathes of Ulster in the 18th century were strongly Irish speaking.
Okay,.. I’ll bite. This should not be a matter of the British government treating one constituent country different than another,… it’s a matter for the Northern Ireland assembly to decide now that policing and justice is devolved.
There are many different laws between Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland,…. Scotland operates under a different legal system to the rest of the UK,… does that mean it should be compelled to change to make sure there is parity throughout the state?
Personally, I think thats a matter for the Scots and their government.
As for using Irish in Northern Irish courts,… well I firmly believe that’s a matter for Northern Ireland government/ people, not central government.
You are saying we should not be discussing the republic’s Irish language policy? Well it’s only natural to look as part of comparison of policies (like you are doing with Wales) and practicalities. You can’t have it both ways.
Still waiting for that apology.
Danny,
You are 100% correct on your history of the Irish language. There is no reason why the Irish language cannot be recognized again. It’s still all about controlling the Irish.
Danny – you may not have explicitly stated that English was not good for Ireland but you did have a whole paragraph where you started off saying English was the root of all success in Ireland, then going on to list pretty much every bad thing that has happened here under those successes.
Is it that much of a reach to suggest someone that says this doesnt think English has been good for Ireland?
On your point a) I honestly dont know, but you are probably right.
Concubhar – dont different regions get treated differently all the time within the UK?
Apologise for what Old Sod? Calling the Republic the south? Why should I apologise to you for that shorthand? Have you been elected President or something?
I don’t care who takes the question on board re the 1737 act – the UK Government or the NI Executive but given that it’s a statute which is on the UK statute book, it should start there. The different legal systems in the UK, apart from NI, all allow people who speak a minority language to plead in that language before the courts, Welsh in Wales, Scots Gaelic in Scotland. So why is Irish in Ni courts different?
And I’ve heard the “Irish is divisive’ argument before – it’s a joke. It’s an excuse to do nothing. Everything progressive is divisive in NI because change is resisted by one side or the other always.
You called me a bigot. The fact that I have to point it out for you 3 times says everything. Clearly you are not mature enough to address your childish name calling, so why should I bother addressing you or engaging in debate with you again?
“you’re making a petty sectarian point with no evidence to back it up except your own narrow prejudices.” Your words.
But they still didn’t have to abandon Irish in the home. Knowing English and using it for economic reasons does not exclude retention of the native tongue as migrant groups across the world frequently demonstrate. For example, the Hispanic population in the US.
Was bilingualism simply beyond the Irish?
It’s clear that the vast majority in the UK and Ireland find bilingualism too difficult – I like to think that it’s one of the things we got from the British. In other countries people have no problem with being bilingual or multilingual….
it’s not specifically an Irish thing…. My own belief is that English being such a dominant language has a very strong negative influence against bilingualism….
I’m still not sure what ‘benefits’ have come to Ireland that wouldn’t have come if it had remained largely Irish speaking.
Explain your argument in terms of Scots Gaelic as the same applies in Scotland as does in Wales.
Welsh is an Indo Celtic language whereas Scots or Irish is more Western European. They are both languages, which are about longer than modern English, but are not related.
They are not dialects, unlike so called Ulster Scots.
“that’s a foreign country”
No it’s not!
Galway 1-10 Meath 0-07