Wreath-laying in memory of war dead banned by Parades Commission

The Parades Commission has not only placed its usual restrictions on the Twelfth morning and evening parades by Dunloy LOL 496 but following last year’s illegal republican protest they have banned the Orangemen from assembling (note assembling not parading/marching/walking) outside Dunloy Presbyterian Church to lay a wreath in memory of war dead. Local Unionist and Republican elected representatives are meeting with the parades commission. (This thread has been updated and corrected, justin clarified the ceremony isn’t at a formal war memorial but a ceremony to remember war dead held at Dunloy Presbyterian Church).

  • Good to see good news.

  • DaithiO

    Fair Deal,

    As a Slugger Blogger aren’t you supposed to post impartially. The style of your writing makes your allegiance clear ?

  • Stephen Copeland

    Fair_play,

    Maybe if Dunloy LOL 496 had engaged with local residents, then they might have been able to come to an agreement? After all, the Parades Commission did ‘encourage all sides to get together to discuss parading difficulties. It stressed the importance of parade organisers seizing opportunities to engage with residents with an aim to securing good relationships regarding parading issues.

    Points 10-13 of the determination make it all pretty clear:

    10. The Commission has also had regard to the issue of engagement. One of the seven fundamental principles identified by the North Report is that all those involved should work towards resolution of difficulties through local accommodation. As required by the statutory Guidelines, the Commission has had regard to the seven North principles.

    11. As indicated at page 15 of its second Annual Report, the Commission (while avoiding an excessively prescriptive approach) considers the essence of engagement to be attempts at genuine communication between protagonists to a particular parading dispute. A series of ‘pointers’ to what constitutes genuine engagement is listed on page16 of that report.

    12. As stated in paragraph 4.4 of the Guidelines, the Commission takes into account any communications between parade organisers and the local community or the absence thereof. Further, the Commission will assess the measures, if any, offered or taken by parade organisers to address genuinely held relevant concerns of members of the local community.

    13. In the present case the Commission is not aware of any meaningful engagement having taken place in advance of this parade.

    So, I think Dunloy LOL 496 have a fairly good idea of what they have to do. And this is not the first time that this has been said to them (and their brethren).

    As the PC itself says, “it is not enough for the Orders to claim simply that they will not threaten public disorder themselves. They are aware that their actions arouse fears, concerns and even anger of people living in the area through which they wish to parade. Surely it is not unreasonable that they would wish to understand the nature and origin of those emotions and seek to contribute to the promotion of understanding, and thereby, respect and tolerance“.

    So please save us the crocodile tears, fair_play, and get your people to talk to the residents.

  • sluggerwatcher

    so instead of punishing the ILLEGAL protestors the law abiding orangemen are punished. gotta love the equal society we are now living in

  • darth rumsfeld

    ..no need to worry about the illegal protest then Stephen?

  • fair_deal

    DaithiO

    “As a Slugger Blogger aren’t you supposed to post impartially”

    No. I am listed as a politco blogger, the site does not claim me as a neutral nor have I claimed to be such either.

    SC

    The requirement for dialogue is for parading. This decision specifically bans a non-parade event. Since when did remembering war dead need someone’s elses permission?

  • Bryan Boru

    I understood the Parades Commission were responsible only for parades – ie they can restrict, re-route or impose conditions on a parade. If this was simply a gathering at a church to lay a wreath, it would not, under the terms of the legislation, fall to the Commission to make a decision. However, the notified route of the outward parade is Dunloy Orange Hall, Station Road, Main Street, Dunloy Presbyterian Church, Main Street, Station Road, Dunloy Orange Hall. It is therefore a parade and not a simple laying of wreaths. Presumably the Order is free to assemble at the Church and lay their wreath, and should be free from all pressure from residents to do so. I assume that there is still some element of free speech in Dunloy?

  • fair_deal

    Bryan Boru

    “Presumably the Order is free to assemble at the Church and lay their wreath, and should be free from all pressure from residents to do so. I assume that there is still some element of free speech in Dunloy?”

    An incorrect presumption I an afraid. From the determination:

    “B.The parade participants and supporters shall not assemble on any part of the notified route other than as directed in paragraph A”

    Paragrapgh a restricts them to within about 20 yards of the Orange Hall

  • dantheman

    FAIR DEAL

    “No. I am listed as a politco blogger, the site does not claim me as a neutral nor have I claimed to be such either.”

    Why have you decided to name yourself “Fair Deal” then?????????????? What are the origins of this bizarre title you have bestowed on yourself??

  • fair_deal

    It is taken from the DUP slogan “It is time for a fair deal”

  • Stephen Copeland

    darth rumsfeld,

    ..no need to worry about the illegal protest then Stephen?

    The PC makes the determination, and it is (I presume) up to the PSNI to police it. What is your point?

  • Bryan Boru

    Fair_deal

    Noted, thanks for the clarification. However, I would be reasonably confident that once the parade has completed its 20 yard marathon, and has broken up so to speak, it ceases to be a parade. I doubt that there is anything legally to stop the brethren making their way to the church as individuals, and laying their wreath(s). There is need to be careful that:
    a. A wreath laying is not used to circumvent a legal determination, whether or not one approves of the determination, but also
    b. That people should be able to pay their respects to war dead in an honourable fashion.
    Perhaps such an outcome can yet be facilitated, even in Norn’ Irn’ on the 12th July. Come on folks, what about some fair play and common sense?

  • Stephen Copeland

    Fair_deal,

    Since when did remembering war dead need someone’s elses permission?

    Um, when you insist on doing it in semi-military formation, wearing Orange regalia, then since the Parades Commission was set up you need permission. You know that, I presume?

    If you want to just ‘remember’ them, then nobody will stop you. Nor if you do it as part of a church service. It is only when you want to mix your ‘remembrance’ up with a politico-sectarian parade that it becomes problematic. Take off the sashes, and walk on the pavement like normal people, and you’d be amazed at what is possible!

  • T.Ruth

    So Freedom of Assembly is also banned in Dunloy.
    What an advertisement for those who talk about inclusivity,parity of esteem etc.
    Dunloy

  • fair_deal

    Bryan Boru

    The situation you describe is what has occurred on previous years. However, the drafting of this year’s determination goes out of its way to exclude that option.

    As for your hope that such an outcome would be facilitated last year’s illegal protest to prevent such a scenario and the likes of SC’s objections to “semi-military formations” etc shows the barrel scraping that goes on to stop the laying of a poppy wreath

    SC

    “when you insist on doing it in semi-military formation, wearing Orange regalia”

    Jesus wept. When is standing on a footpath round a war memorial “semi-military formation”?
    Please tell me what is so dangerous about Orange cloth? Can you provide me with the court ruling that says human rights protections cease to apply when a person joins the OO?

  • loftholdingswood

    “What an advertisement for those who talk about inclusivity,parity of esteem etc. ”

    Exactly. Words can be used to masquerade as truth when they are but fiction. Sinn Fein and any “residents” coalition/group are past masters of demanding their rights but seem unable to comprehend other peoples rights. And so on a 12th day of July they can bare facedly claim that they are concerned about public order offences (committed by themselves no doubt) because some people want to lay a wreath. A wreath!. These people know no decency or humanity. They seethe with venom and spite.

  • frank

    “Please tell me what is so dangerous about Orange cloth”

    When its surrounded by loyalist paramilitary bands and supporters.

    Ditch the sectarian, paramilitary killers from within the organisation & marches, and then discuss human rights.

  • Stephen Copeland

    Fair_play,

    When is standing on a footpath round a war memorial “semi-military formation”?

    When it is a part of a notified parade. That is when! If a crowd of people just walked along a pavement and stopped at a memorial, it doesn’t even count as a parade, and so needs no permission. The OO needs permission because it doesn’t act like ‘normal people (or tourists). It needs permission because it insists on marching in formation (that is semi-military) and wearing recognisable emblems (also quasi-military). It also (strangle) insists on walking in the road, when the local authority has been generous enough to provide pavements.

    Please tell me what is so dangerous about Orange cloth?

    As the Parades Commission. Or better still, ask the local residents!

    Cloth itself is fairly harmless, it is the people who wear it that worry me. And presumably also worry the residents of Dunloy, who may have a list of eexamples of wearers of orange cloth by day who wear balaaclavas aat night. I don’t know – but maybe they do. Ask them. Why are you so afraid of talking to people?

    Can you provide me with the court ruling that says human rights protections cease to apply when a person joins the OO?

    Straw man argument.

  • Stephen Copeland

    It also (strangle) insists on walking in the road …

    LOL

    ‘strangle’ should really read ‘strangely’.

    Maybe it was a Freudian slip ….

  • barnshee

    know Dunloy well

    The only people whoi wear balaclavas are the local Provos

  • fair_deal

    frank

    “When its surrounded by loyalist paramilitary bands and supporters.”

    1. The band which accompanies the Lodge is Dunloy Accordion Band. What evidence do you have that it is a parmilitary band? http://www.dunloyaccordionband.co.uk/
    2. The ceremony at the war memorial doesn’t involve “supporters”, paramilitary or otherwise.

    Any other non-existent excuses for banning the laying of a wreath?

  • fair_deal

    “who may have a list of eexamples of wearers of orange cloth by day who wear balaaclavas aat night.”

    Hmmm. Hint at an allegation but provide nothing to substantiate it. IMO a drop in your usual good standards of comment.

    “If a crowd of people just walked along a pavement and stopped at a memorial, it doesn’t even count as a parade, and so needs no permission.”

    1. The Lodge applies to parade to the memorial. The PC says no. Faced with a ban the lodge then doesn’t parade but gathers at the memorial ie “stopping at a memorial”. This year the PC determination specifically bans this. The PC believes it needed there permission and has banned it

  • Stephen Copeland

    Fair_deal,

    I was clear, I think. I said that I do not know if there are Dunloy orangemen who have double lives. I said, and I say again, ask the people who are objecting. Ask them why they object, ask them who they object to, and maybe you might see their point, or they might see yours. At the very least, you will take away the PC’s main criticism of the OO.

    I ask again, why are you so afraid of talking to people?

  • fair_deal

    “I said that I do not know”

    If you don’t know then don’t impune.

    “I ask again, why are you so afraid of talking to people?”

    Fear has nowt to do with it. I don’t expect or demand the right to dictate to another community how it expresses itself whether that be what date it marks, how it does so and what symbols it chooses to display when/how it can remember war dead and I expect the same in return. Its called tolerance and acceptance of rights not particularly difficult concepts.

  • dodrade

    Is Dunloy really so full of hatred?

  • loftholdingswood

    “I ask again, why are you so afraid of talking to people?”

    I tried this once at a public meeting at the local Community Centre. The meeting was arranged to discuss an attack on two Protestant youths at the time but it was also to discuss “the way forward” for parades (band and Orange), community relations and living together in a “shared space”. The responses were mostly hostile but what sticks in my mind was when a Catholic resident stated that she did not mind if a parade was held as long as it was orderly and finished reasonably early she was shouted down and abused. When I asked about the possibilty of parading with consent I got the following;

    “Never in a million years”

    “You F***** Black B****”

    “I’ll rip your F*** head off”

    And so on. It degenerated into the usual farce.

    Of course in a Stephen Copeland universe we all sit down with a cup of tea and earnestly reach agreement and recognise that we are truly alike. We all go home to our little middle class homes and send our perfect children to lovely new Integrated schools where they preach tolerance and love. And we all live happily ever after.

    Sadly there are many Stephen Copeland’s who pretend that these things would solve all of our problems. Yet deep down the Stephen Copeland’s of this world hate us as passionately as the most active Republican and wishes we were wiped from the face of the earth.

    But, hey, it’s good to talk. As long as you can’t march. Or place a wreath. Or want to be British. Or want to be left alone.

  • Stephen Copeland

    Fair_deal,

    Its called tolerance and acceptance of rights not particularly difficult concepts.

    If your words are sincere then I applaud them. If you are as liberal as you seem to be saying, then I presume you also support the basic human right to live without fear of sectarian harrassment? The problem is that ‘your’ rights might come into conflict with the rights of the residents, and if you are truly liberal, you will seek, through discussion with them, the best outcome that protects, as far as possible, their rights while according you your rights.

    You may consider it your right not to be dictated to (a libertarian, rather even than a liberal!), but you must then support the rights of the residents not to have their enjoyment of their liberty and peace of mind dictated by you.

    The best (indeed maybe the only) way to maximise both groups enjoyment of their rights, with the minimum disruption, is through communication.

    So again, why will you not talk to them to try to agree a solution?

  • darth rumsfeld

    “The PC makes the determination, and it is (I presume) up to the PSNI to police it. What is your point?”

    The point (as I have no doubt you know) is that the major issue last year was a completely illegal protest took place- for which, surprise, surprise, noone has appeared before a court. The Orange Lodge did not break the law, yet you get on your hobbyhorse to pillory them, while not having anything to say about those people who didn’t even accept the route defined in the parades’ commission determination. An objective reader might almost think you admired the protesters- heaven forfend , eh Stephen?

  • fair_deal

    I do verge on the libertarian and on parading rights, I am also consistent in their exercise, if you care you can check my comments on the Ballymena republican parade thread. You may have also spotted my regular threads against the introduction of ID cards.

    “The problem is that ‘your’ rights might come into conflict with the rights of the residents,”

    This is a ‘false’ concept. First case law basically addresses any conflicts. Also there is no conflict of rights. A parade can proceed along a public road through Dunloy without effecting anyone’s liberty.

    “the rights of the residents not to have their enjoyment of their liberty and peace of mind dictated by you.”

    The exercise of freedom of assembly, association and speech don’t do anything to the liberty or peace of mind of others. How does laying a poppy wreath upset peace of mind exactly?

  • Stephen Copeland

    loftholdingswood,

    Yet deep down the Stephen Copeland’s of this world hate us as passionately as the most active Republican and wishes we were wiped from the face of the earth.

    Hey, please don’t put words in my mouth.

    Of course in a Stephen Copeland universe we all sit down with a cup of tea and earnestly reach agreement and recognise that we are truly alike.

    Or … we could recongise that there are some situations that are just too tense, and do our little bit to ease the tension. Its not as if you’re short of places to march, or anything. There are over 3,000 marches, 99% of which are not controversial. Where there clearly is a problem, maybe the smart thing would be to cool the passions by simply enjoying the 2,970 other parades?

    We all go home to our little middle class homes and send our perfect children to lovely new Integrated schools where they preach tolerance and love. And we all live happily ever after.

    OK, that bit I can’t argue with.

  • Stephen Copeland

    darth rumsfeld,

    … surprise, surprise, noone has appeared before a court.

    Talk to the PSNI. Do it through your local District Policing Partnership.

    I’m guessing that you support a party that is represented on it.

    If the PSNI have not prosecuted anyone, are you really suggesting that it is because of some sinister pro-republican agenda in the PSNI? Really?

  • Carnhill

    “These people know no decency or humanity. They seethe with venom and spite.”

    Now, now Loftholdingswood – Have you been taking speech lessons from Dr Paisley ? would ye ever wise up ? I’m sure if ye went up to Dunloy today and laid a wreath at the war memorial ye’d be perfectly safe. Actin the drama-queen does little to help matters !

  • Justin

    Clarification

    Dunloy does not have a War memorial.

    However, some Orangemen have do pay their respects to dead relatives in the Church yard. This is not the point that has proved contentious.

    Previously the band (or maybe some members) played music while standing on the Street outside.

    There are 2 points of view
    1. It’s just a wreath laying ceromony
    2. It’s an assembly in a public place which wasn’t agreed to in the Parade’s Commision determination.

    Either way, its only going to be settled by talking.

  • Nevin

    [i]12.As stated in paragraph 4.4 of the Guidelines, the Commission takes into account any communications between parade organisers and the local community or the absence thereof. Further, the Commission will assess the measures, if any, offered or taken by parade organisers to address genuinely held relevant concerns of members of the local community.

    13.In the present case the Commission is not aware of any meaningful engagement having taken place in advance of this parade.[/i]

    Do you suppose the Parades Commission applied this principle to the recent paramilitary Hunger Strikers Commemoration parade in Ballycastle? Was the local community, in particular victims of paramilitary violence and organised crime, canvassed for its views by the Parades Commission? Or maybe the Commission leaves it to dissenters to face the wrath of the local paramilitary godfather should they be courageous enough to object?

  • Why

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/5164024.stm
    “A wreath-laying ceremony can take place during a restricted Orange Order parade in County Antrim, the Parades Commission has said.”

  • North Antrim

    Nope, Dunloy people want to speak to the parade organisers on the basis of mutual respect and moving this process forward – Not an unreasonable request. Of course to the Orangemen this is anathema. Dunloy people have no problem with wreath-laying ceremonies, but the assembling of the band on the road AWAY FROM THE CHURCH is, as far as the OO are concerned, a victory over local residents – its not about remembering the dead at all.

  • [i]”A parade can proceed along a public road through Dunloy without effecting anyone’s liberty.”[/i]

    But, for as long as you use the road, whether for a parade or an assembly, you deny the use of the road to others which might be a minor or really a major problem, but the road is public and should be available to all at all times for passage — since that’s what a highway is there for.

    Seems to me that there is some confusion here which US experience might help resolve. The general rule here is that the highway is public property, e.g. to be be used by anyone at any time as an unrestricted passageway. Now, a parade denies the use of the highway as a passageway to others for as long as the parade lasts.

    So, no group may deny the use of the pasageway to others without first obtaining the permission of government. If the group fails to do so, then they are subject to arrest and penalty — usually a fine.

    The government in question here is, usually, whichever government is responsible for maintaining the roadway, village, town, county or State.

    And the rules have to be the same for all oganizations seeking permission and applied equally to all.

    BTW, in general, the organization which seeks permission is asked to list those inits particiapating in the parade. Any group not listed is barred from the parade route.

    The reading here is that freedom of assembly does NOT include the right to use public property for your assembly.

  • Donnacha

    If the point of the wreath-laying ceremony is to honour the dead, then why not do it outside the marhcing season? Unless, of course, it is more than just a wreath-laying and is an integral part of the parade?

  • fair_deal

    Bob

    “you deny the use of the road”

    Please provide me with the Human rights treaty that includes the inalienable right to drive down a public road at all times that is being denied?

    “should be available to all at all times for passage”

    Please think about that. You are saying that freedom of assembly should be completely banned.

    “US experience might help resolve”

    Dunloy is in the UK.

    Donnacha

    “then why not do it outside the marhcing season?”

    Sheesh. So if they apply in October to walk to the Churchyard to lay the wreath, residents objections would disappear. Nonsense.

  • Loyalist

    Taigs (the poster, not the grand mass of provo mopes who occupy this site) hailed the good newsthat the service of remeberance had been banned…..oh dear….

    FROM DUP.ORG.UK

    North Antrim DUP MP Ian Paisley and MLA Mervyn Storey have welcomed the
    change by the Parades Commission of its determination regarding Dunloy Orange Lodge for the 12th morning. The DUP Representatives said,

    “We welcome the fact that the Parades Commission has modified its determination which will allow the Remembrance Service to take place as normal.

    It is regrettable that the Commission allowed such a restrictive and
    draconian determination to be made in the first place. The first determination by the Commission was a reward to republican lawbreakers. We remember well that last 12th morning the level of sectarianism displayed by republicans in Dunloy against the wreath lying service reached a level so great that the local
    SF/IRA representative lost control and had to call in big brother in the shape
    of Martin McGuinness.

    We trust that the Orange Brethren will now be allowed to remember the dead
    in a dignified manner as they have always done for many years.”

  • Loyalist

    Fair-deal

    “Please think about that. You are saying that freedom of assembly should be completely banned.”

    No. That is not what Bob, the IRA apologist is saying. He’s saying it should be completely banned for Protestants.

  • [i]”Please provide me with the Human rights treaty that includes the inalienable right to drive down a public road at all times that is being denied?”[/i]

    Don’t need to. Please show us where the freedom of assembly includes the right to take over any locale the group chooses. read it again, f-d. The declarations do NOT include the right to use public property in such a way as to deny its use to others.

    [i]”He’s saying it should be completely banned for Protestants.[/i]

    An all too typical response and quite wrong since I pointed out that the same rules must apply to all.