AG tells Allister his bill is NOT in breach of the ECHR…

Now this Letter to Mr Jim Allister MLA dtd 22 May 2013 from the Attorney General for Northern Ireland has just been released to Slugger, and it contains some  interesting information.

It relates to a number of talking points and concerns raised about the competence of the bill itself and specific concerns that it could be in breach of Article 7 of the European  Convention on Human Rights.

As the AG makes clear in his letter this does not relate to whether the law is a good law or not. That’s a political reserved to political parties involved. But it does mean objections on the grounds of retrospective criminalisation of acts and omissions provision in the ECHR are in his opinion ill founded.

Ms Travers has met with the SDLP leader this afternoon and has expressed herself more hopeful afterwards. With the Assembly in recess the SDLP Assembly group now has some time to reflect on its final decision over or not whether to launch a petition of concern.

  • sherdy

    Could I propose Ann Travers as our next ombudsman?
    So many of our MLAs seem to be running scared of her.
    Is she the only victim of our troubles who counts at all?

  • Mick Fealty

    Well, if they are scared of her, it’s about time! Victims should not have to pursue their case as far as Ms Travers (or put up with the politically motivated abuse she has on social media) just to have some form of justice seen to be done.

    She may not the last one to come out and call the odds either.

  • socaire

    She had the quare support when she was going in to harangue wee Alex, anyway. Does she take as keen an interest in the goings on of the unionist parties or is this a personal vendetta? She has seen two people convicted in the British courts and has hounded a woman from her job. What more does she want?

  • Reader

    socaire: She has seen two people convicted in the British courts and has hounded a woman from her job. What more does she want?
    What would *you* want?
    As for Mary McArdle – didn’t she get a well paid job on the public purse for which you (and very many others) would be better qualified? I’m sure SF will look after her financial interests.

  • socaire

    Well,Reader, if someone from the British State forces shot a relative of mine, I would like to see them in court – even a British court – and convicted and sentenced. What more would I get? And surely the point is that Ms Travers complained to anybody that would listen until she had Ms McArdle driven from her post? Try to keep up.

  • Reader

    socaire: Well,Reader, if someone from the British State forces shot a relative of mine, I would like to see them in court – even a British court – and convicted and sentenced.
    Then there is still that unfinished business with the people who fired the shots, isn’t there?
    And, as has been pointed out numerous times, SPADs are salaried members of the Civil Service, and should meet the usual requirements for CC employees with responsibilities and access to confidential data. The same rules apply to Loyalists and ODCs as well, of course.

  • tomthumbuk

    Special advisors?
    What a joke.
    What advice would you get from a convicted murderer?
    At the cost of £90k p.a. plus the cost of their exotic trips abroad.
    What other country would you get it in?
    Itis only a way of buying off terrorists to stop them from “doing what they do best”..
    Meanwhile we are closing care homes for old people,
    No wonder nearly half the electorate don’t vote.

  • UserAinm

    I’m open to correction on this but I think this point may not be solid:

    ‘And, as has been pointed out numerous times, SPADs are salaried members of the Civil Service, and should meet the usual requirements for CC employees’

    I’ve read here and elsewhere that these SPAD’s and let’s face it specifically Mrs McArdle are civil servants no different to any other and yet this can’t be the case since they don’t, understandably, go through an open recruitment process. So if not everyone can be hired as a SPAD, compared to other civil service roles, then surely the argument that they should be excluded using the standard civil service rules doesn’t work.

  • ArdoyneUnionist
  • Comrade Stalin

    Seamus Mallon has waded in but his comments are strange; he accused the SDLP of sticking two fingers up to the unionists.

    Why does someone like Seamus Mallon conflate placing restrictions on SPaDs with the political interests of unionism ?

  • Alone and Easy Target

    CS,

    Maybe Seamus Mallon is indicating that the SDLP thought they could get away with it because it was a bill being proposed by Jim Allister?

    i.e. trying to portray him as the barrier to agreement.