Latest News & Updates

British Government Breaks its Own Law

30/01/08

A decision made by the British Government in December 2005 to appoint two members of the Orange Order to the Parades Commission in the Six Counties was improper and unlawful, the British House of Lords appeal court in London has ruled today (Wednesday).

In a unanimous decision, the Law Lords stated that:

"No reasonable person, knowing of the two appointees' background and activities, could have supposed that either would bring an objective or impartial judgment to bear on problems raised by the parade in Portadown and similar parades elsewhere,"

and that, "a reasonable Secretary of State could not properly have reached a decision to appoint them as members of the Commission".

The judgment went on to say that, "It was one thing to ensure that the loyalist interest was represented within the commission, but quite another to recruit two hard-line members of the very lodges whose activities had been a focus, probably the main focus, of the serious problems which had caused widespread disorder and led to the establishment of the commission." 

The Parades Commission was established in 1998 following the North Report which investigated the large-scale civil strife that engulfed the Six Counties as a result of triumphalist Orange marches in Portadown,  Belfast’s Ormeau Road, and other isolated nationalist communities in the mid-90s.

The ruling marks the successful culmination of a two-year campaign by the Garvaghy Road Residents Coalition in Portadown, challenging the appointments made by Peter Hain as British Secretary of State in the Six Counties.

Disclosures made during the legal battle also show that the current British direct ruler, Shaun Woodward, then NIO security minister, was also intimately involved in the unlawful appointments and decision-making process.

Speaking after today's ruling, Breandán MacCionnaith, spokesperson for the Garvaghy Road Residents Coalition said:

"From the outset, the GRRC questioned the validity and motivation behind these appointments.  When this present Commission was appointed, we stated that it was far from independent, that it was essentially a packed jury, and that it certainly would not enjoy the confidence of the nationalist community in Portadown.

“Residents were among those publicly criticised by the British government for having the temerity to challenge the appointments.  It was clear to us that political expediency on the part of the British Government had played a major role in the process.

Breandán continued: “The British government had undoubtedly set out to formulate a clear and partisan agenda which was intended to be pro-unionist, pro-loyal orders and pro-sectarian marches.  That agenda and the process through which it was to be delivered has now been proven to have been deeply flawed, unreasonable and unlawful.

"Ever since the present Parades Commission took up office in January 2006, British government ministers, along with the Commission's chair, Roger Poole, have publicly and robustly defended what have now been proven to be totally unlawful appointments.

“It was certainly clear to the nationalist community in Portadown and to all reasonable people that serious conflicts of interests have existed which undermined the credibility and impartiality of the Commission."

MacCionnaith’s  colleague, Joe Duffy, who initiated the case, stated:

"This ruling vindicates the stance which we have taken over the past two years.  During that period, British government ministers publicly accused us of mischief making and of putting factional interests first.  Others, including Roger Poole, have chosen to defend the indefensible.  Our approach all along has been one of integrity and principle.  That approach has now been vindicated by the British Law Lords, one of whom, Lord Brown, states in his published ruling that the residents' position in relation to this whole appointments controversy was the correct one."

MacCionnaith continued: "Today's ruling must now place a major question mark over the manner in which the Commission has handled this controversy and how it has conducted its own internal arrangements.  There are still major issues to be resolved regarding this present Parades Commission, not least of which is how it restores the credibility and integrity enjoyed by the previous Commission.

“A clear starting point must be the re-establishment by the Commission of its impartiality and its independence from British government policies, rather than its willingness to collude in implementing clearly biased agendas.  If that means further changes to the current personnel, then that is the step which must be taken.

"We are aware that the Commission took its own legal advice to examine how conflicts of interests are dealt with.  On the basis of that advice, Roger Poole and his colleagues wrongfully concluded that, provided the interest is declared and taken into account in the Commission's decision making process, those who had declared a conflict of interest could discharge their duties as Commissioners.  It is now clear that decision could not have been more completely erroneous.

“As today's ruling makes clear, commissioners who declared a conflict of interest in relation to their membership or relationship to any of the Loyal Orders could not, and indeed should not, have acted as participants in decisions or mediation in respect of any contentious loyalist parades anywhere in the North.

"We believe that this now places the collective competency of the chair and other members of the Commission under the spotlight."

Joe Duffy added, "Our legal team had to overcome a number of major hurdles, not least of which was the decision by the Belfast Court of Appeal to refuse to allow us leave to have this case tested in the (British) House of Lords.  However, they successfully petitioned the Appellate Committee there in 2006.  Much of today's outcome rests upon their ability, diligence and efforts and I congratulate them for that."

éirígí chairperson, Brian Leeson put today’s small victory down to the efforts of the residents of the Garvaghy Road.

"Due to the persistence of the Garvaghy Road residents, the disgraced British politician Peter Hain has been somewhat stymied in his underhand attempts to create an unlawful, partisan imbalance within the Parades Commission.

"In this, as in other aspects of Britain’s involvement in Irish affairs, it is clear that British ministers operate whatever way they see fit and that international commitments from the British government, such as 'the right to live free from sectarian harassment' as promised in the Good Friday Agreement, are worthless.

"It defies belief that the British administration still contrives to pander to the Orange Order, given the Order's history of anti-Irish racism and sectarian bigotry, which continue to perpetuate division are viewed to be acceptable societal norms by the British government.

"Had Peter Hain attempted to gerrymander the make-up of a comparable public body dealing with ingrained racist attitudes and behaviour in Britain by openly appointing members of a racist organisation to it, he would have been pilloried by his colleagues.  But it appears that within the Six Counties, such unlawful gerrymandering is deemed to be the norm and wholly acceptable by the British government."