Are some victims campaigns more acceptable than others?

Screen Shot 2013-06-01 at 08.28.23

Never one to pull his punches, in today’s Irish News Newton Emerson gets down to asking an important question of Relatives for Justice, the director of which Mark Thompson has written:

The bill is a direct consequence of the failure to independently deal with the past in an inclusive and holistic way and as such should not be progressed in isolation to a wider process of inclusive truth recovery. Ideally this issue should be the opportunity to now convene meaningful and substantive discussions on how best we deal with the past.

It’s very hard to disagree with that statement. And indeed RFJ does a lot of important work not just campaigning but supporting for the victims of state violence. But the inconsistency Emerson notes here boils down to the depiction of activism though the legislature as somehow out of bounds of that holistic approach, and activism through the courts, the police ombudsman, the coroner, pressure for international intervention etc as firmly in.


Discover more from Slugger O'Toole

Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.

We are reader supported. Donate to keep Slugger lit!

For over 20 years, Slugger has been an independent place for debate and new ideas. We have published over 40,000 posts and over one and a half million comments on the site. Each month we have over 70,000 readers. All this we have accomplished with only volunteers we have never had any paid staff.

Slugger does not receive any funding, and we respect our readers, so we will never run intrusive ads or sponsored posts. Instead, we are reader-supported. Help us keep Slugger independent by becoming a friend of Slugger. While we run a tight ship and no one gets paid to write, we need money to help us cover our costs.

If you like what we do, we are asking you to consider giving a monthly donation of any amount, or you can give a one-off donation. Any amount is appreciated.