Bizarre. Indeed

Meanwhile, the Secretary of State’s legal representative, on behalf of the NIO, on behalf of etc.. is at the Court of Appeal today. Contesting the High Court ruling on the appointment procedure followed by the NIO, and the Secretary of State, which resulted in Don MacKay and David Burrows appointed to the Parades Commission. The appeals may end today and the decision is expected to be reserved.. but, according to this Belfast Telegraph report, things may not be going well for the Secretary of State.From the Belfast Telegraph –

The Court of Appeal heard that Secretary of State Peter Hain wrote to the loyal orders because an official apparently included them in a list on her own initiative. The letters were central to a High Court ruling removing Orangeman David Burrows from the Commission this month.

Mr Hain is appealing the ruling, which found that officials were wrong to solicit applications from the loyal orders without considering if they should also ask nationalist groups.

The official in charge of the recruitment, Carol Moore, had told the High Court she believed the orders were inserted into a list of parties for Mr Hain to write to by another official, Diana Turkington. But the explanation could not be checked as Ms Turkington is on maternity leave.

“It’s rather remarkable that a decision of that kind should be taken by a middle management official without consultation,” Lord Justice Nicholson remarked during yesterday’s hearing. “Bizarre, it strikes me.”


  • Bemused

    Brian Kerr’s Court of Appeal will give a full-scale kick in the balls to Hain on this one – the thinking will be that if he didn’t get the message the first time round (with Declan Morgan’s fairly gently worded judgement) then he can take his medicine with a starkly critical judgement on appeal. I predict resignation territory once the Court of Appeal issues it’s written judgement on this one.

  • Pat

    It is easy to see how and why the majority of people in England, scotland and Wales believe the Labour Party has lost it’s way and distant from the people.

    How can Peter Hain Not see or understand why a High Court Judge can come to the conclusion that asking (soliciting) one group of people in a dispute and then appointing two members of that same side to rule on the outcome of those disputes, to be wrong and not reflective of the communities or the dispute itself?

    On a Tribunal consisting of seven (7) people who decide the outcome it is clear that by appointing two members of one side of a dispute is an attempt to rig the outcome.

    The dismissive attitude of Mr Hain is unbelievable, and then to critise people for going to court in order to challenge his clear biased appointment process simply shows to the world that this man thinks he is some kind of king who’s ruling and decisions should not be questioned.

    Clearly it is reflective of the overall attitude of the Labour Government and an attitude that will eventually lead to their losing office!!