05/02/14

“FLAGS AND EMBLEMS”,
Allegiance to the State surrendered

“CONTENDING WITH THE PAST”
Justice surrendered

“PARADES, SELECT COMMEMORATIONS, and RELATED PROTESTS”,
Fundamental freedoms surrendered

ALSO

The Alternatives for

"FREEDOM OF PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY",

"FLAGS AND EMBLEMS OF THE STATE" and

"JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS OF TERRORISM"

IN NORTHERN IRELAND

Introduction

This document provides a summary analysis of the Haass proposals (pages 2-8). It also describes the Alternative proposals (pages 9-11) which would benefit the people of Northern Ireland as a whole, promote their fundamental freedoms and deliver justice for the victims of terrorism. The Haass Proposals constitute only the emerged 'tip of the iceberg' since their implementation would require substantial new legislation in order to create a complex and costly organisation. Understanding the implications of what is proposed by Haass should lead every law-abiding citizen in Northern Ireland to seriously consider and support the Alternatives proposed in this document for freedom of peaceful assembly, the flags and emblems of the State and justice for the victims of terrorism in Northern Ireland.



Understanding the implications of the Haass proposals on
“Flags and Emblems”
(Proposed - A new Commission set-up to deal with a wide range of issues)

1. The proposals on Flags and Emblems are based on the wrong premise, since according to Dr Haass these symbols of sovereignty should be seen in Northern Ireland in the context of the Belfast Agreement signed in 1998.

2. The proposals made by Dr Haass should not be approved for the following reasons:

- The 1998 Belfast Agreement is not a legislative document and as such does not determine the international legal status of Northern Ireland as being part of the United Kingdom.

- The Belfast Agreement was implemented by way of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, which states that Northern Ireland in its entirety remains part of the United Kingdom and shall not cease to be so without the consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland voting in a poll.

- Until a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, voting in a poll, decides to join the Republic of Ireland, the only flags and emblems that can legally be flown in Northern Ireland are those of the United Kingdom and of the British Monarchy.

- The new process promoting Irishness, which would progressively eradicate all reference to Britishness, will create more instability within Northern Ireland society and in the medium/long term generate even more public disorder.

3. Whilst nothing could be agreed on Flags and Emblems, it was proposed that a new Commission should be established to discuss the role of identity, culture and traditions in the life of the citizens of Northern Ireland. These issues, which are common to many parts of the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland society, should not bring into question the constitutional position of Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom.

4. The Commission would be dealing with a whole range of issues that have the potential to undermine the internationally recognised status of Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom.

5. In addition to flags and emblems, the Commission will be dealing with the Irish language, a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland, gender issue, public holidays, memorabilia, symbols, emblems and signage displayed in local and central government buildings, symbols of national and other identities, and will also be open to consider other topics.

Conclusion: Since the agreed and legal status of Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom has not constituted the basis of all discussions, the setting up of yet again another Commission will only open the floodgate for the consideration of numerous issues that have the potential to adversely affect the rights and fundamental freedoms of the people of Northern Ireland.

Allegiance to the State surrendered



Understanding the implications of the Haass proposals on
“Contending with the Past”
(Proposed - The Report of the Consultative Group on the Past (2009) reinstated)

1. The basis for this proposal concerning the past has been drafted in order to avoid any reference to acknowledging the truth of what happened in Northern Ireland in relation to the terrorist campaign started in 1968, which officially ended in 1998. Instead of stating the existence of terrorism, the proposals substitute words such as “war, conflict or Troubles”. The real victims of terrorism, who are entitled to truth, justice and acknowledgement, are not mentioned even once in the Haass proposals.

2. Terrorism was never justified in Northern Ireland and those who wished to see a change in the international status of Northern Ireland should have pursued their political aims by way of the peaceful democratic means that were available to them.

3. In these proposals there is no attempt to define the various categories of victims, particularly the victims of terrorism, so as to best address their needs (page 22) and the attempt is made to equate law enforcement officers with terrorists, and make them all equally responsible for what happened during the thirty years terrorist campaign (page 23).

4. It is proposed that a new body, the Historical Investigative Unit (HIU), be established through legislation. All the powers that are at present those of the Historical Enquiries Team, the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland and the Police Service of Northern Ireland will be transferred to the HIU for the investigation of historical cases. The HIU will have access to all files and also to intelligence detained by the PSNI (page 27). It will be for the HIU to decide whether to refer a case to the Public Prosecution Service. The Policing Board will consider candidates from within and outside Northern Ireland to be appointed as director of the HIU. It is not known who will be employed to carry out the investigative work, although they will apparently not be police officers. There is no reason or guarantee that the HIU will deliver a better outcome than the HET, PONI and the PSNI are currently delivering.

5. The other proposed body is the Independent Commission for Information Retrieval (ICRC) that will be independent from the justice system. The ICRC will be used to provide information to the families of those who were killed. However, information and documentation retrieved through the ICIR will not be able to be used in prosecutions. This will, in effect, grant immunity to anybody against whom there is evidence that he/she took part in terrorist activities. Any person who has been involved in acts of terrorism and wishes to escape prosecution will be able to volunteer information (page 31), which may not be to the advantage of the victims and their families. The ICRC will be empowered to offer immunity in both civil and criminal courts (page 34) and whatever raw information is provided to the ICRC, it will not be disclosed to the judiciary (page 34).

6. In addition the ICRC will also have an internal unit to analyse patterns or themes which may well lead to both the rewriting of the history of the terrorist campaign and its justification (page 32-33). The ICRC will be staffed with lawyers, historians and academics (page 35).

Conclusion: This proposed two-tier system will be to the advantage of those who to this day have escaped the rigour of the law. The Historical Investigative Unit will be a complex and expensive organisation which will control the use of information and intelligence and it is unlikely that it will deliver any satisfactory outcome for the innocent victims of terrorism. The Independent Commission for Information Retrieval will provide for those who have been involved in terrorist activities the ideal means of obtaining complete and final immunity.

Justice surrendered



Understanding the implications of the Haass proposals on
“Parades, Select Commemorations and Related Protests”,
(Proposed - The Hillsborough Agreement (2010) aggravated)

1. The proposals by Haass concerning public assemblies in Northern Ireland are extensively based on those made (and already rejected), resulting from the Hillsborough Agreement (2010), and which have now been extended to apply not only to public processions but also to static meetings designated as “Select Commemorations”.

2. What used to be the Office of Public Assemblies, Parades and Protests (OPAPP) and the Public Assemblies, Parades and Protests Body (PAPPB) under the Hillsborough Agreement are now rebranded the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests (‘the Office’) and the Authority for Public Events Adjudication (‘the Authority’). The procedures and rules that apply to the system are essentially the same as those produced in the Hillsborough Agreement, albeit with further constraints imposed on the organiser.

3. In 2010 the Loyal Orders dismissed the proposals made in the Hillsborough Agreement and it must be acknowledged that unfortunately there is nothing more inviting in the Haass proposals to justify the Orders consenting to them. Furthermore, there is nothing in these proposals that would provide a way of effectively addressing and resolving outstanding issues. The failures of the Haass proposals are outlined as follows:
- Nowhere in this proposal is the right to freedom of religion mentioned, as references are made only to the right to freedom of expression. However the High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland stated in the case Dunloy v Parades Commission that a public procession whose purpose is to attend a religious service “is a manifestation of religion”. The Loyal Orders are religious organisations and their right to freedom of religion exercised in conjunction with their right to freedom of peaceful assembly is of paramount importance.
- The proposals do not promote the right to freedom of peaceful assembly but support opposition to the exercise of that right with a variety of arguments. Reference is made to the ‘right for everyone to be free from sectarian harassment’, which has never been clearly defined and can be used by objectors and protesters as a means to abusively prevent peaceful public assemblies from taking place. Mention is also made of a wide variety of human rights of individuals engaged in or affected by a parade or protest but no attempt is made to determine a balanced approach between the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and the rights of others.
- Although there is an emphasis on the way assemblies should be conducted nowhere in the proposals is there the basic consideration or mention of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly as applying to peaceful assemblies only. Those who organise or take part in any form of public assembly which is not entirely peaceful in intent and practice have no rights under the law and there should be a process for prohibiting these kinds of assemblies from taking place.
- The proposals are constantly focused on the necessity of engagement and face-to-face contact between assembly organisers and objectors/protesters, although in the Dunloy v Parades Commission judgment the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland stated that “organisers of processions cannot reasonably be expected to enter into face-to-face dialogue with self-appointed soi-disant “representatives” who are not selected by any proper democratic method [and] who may operate on the edge of legality or who may in fact be encouraging vociferous and threatening opposition”.
- The proposed body making determinations would take into consideration the participation or non-participation of the assembly organiser in face-to-face dialogue or mediation and any explanations offered for non-participation, although today the Parades Commission does not make face-to-face contact between the public procession organiser and people within the locality a requirement.

Conclusion: The Haass proposals will further seriously undermine the right to freedom of peaceful assembly exercised in conjunction with the right to freedom of religion and the right to freedom of expression for law-abiding people in the context of a democratic society in Northern Ireland.

Fundamental freedoms surrendered



Overview of the minimum requirements to be complied with by the Parades Organiser if
the Haass proposals are approved and implemented
(based on the Hillsborough Agreement 2010)

Note: You will have 11 Mountains to Climb and 53 Hurdles to Jump
Are YOU - the Organiser of this Parade prepared for this Marathon Battle?

Stage (Hurdle) No 1 - Preparation by way of local dialogue:
o Local dialogue should start at the earliest possible time without waiting for the notification of the public parade.

The Parades Organiser:
1. Must consider all of the aspects of the parade in advance with a view to identifying and seeking to address all relevant issues which may lead to disputes;
2. Must identify sensitive locations and hold informal discussions with local residents, business people and those with a legitimate interest in the proposed parade prior to submitting formal notification to the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests;
3. Must seek to address reasonable local concerns about the proposed parade prior to notifying the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests;
4. Must state the measures he is taking to address relevant issues.

Stage (Hurdle) No 2 - Notification of the public parade:
o Notification must be submitted on a form to the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests by the Parades Organiser at least 25 working days prior to the date of the parade.

The Parades Organiser:
5. Must make every effort to minimise any adverse impact the parade might have on the locality;
6. Should take into consideration places identified in any notified concerns or objections as raising valid human rights issues;
7. Should take into account any place of cultural or religious significance;
8. Should take into consideration places connected to the past conflict;
9. Must consider any sensitive locations that exist in the immediate vicinity of the parade and identify this location on the form;
10. Must state what measures he is taking to address the relevant issues;
11. Must identify those categories of participants and third party participants (eg. Bands) expected to take part in the public parade;
12. Must promptly inform the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests of the eventual cancellation of the public parade and confirm it in writing;
13. Should submit the notification form as early as possible in order to create as much opportunity as possible for issues to be resolved through face-to-face meetings;
14. Should refer to the late notification and emergency procedures if it is not possible to anticipate the parade in time to give the amount of notification necessary;
15. Must note that it is an offence to knowingly organise a parade for which notice has not been given;
16. Should take note of informal discussions on the notification form that will be considered by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication if the parade proceeds to adjudication;
17. Should take into account any place where there has been a history of disorder relating to parades or protests.

Stage (Hurdle) No 3 - Notice of concerns or objections:
o An objector can submit a notice of concerns and objections form to the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests within 10 working days after the publication of the notification of the public parade form. Copy of the notice form will be sent to the Parades Organiser by the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests.

The Parades Organiser:
18. Should read the form carefully with a view to finding a way to address the issues raised, as objectors will have outlined the reasons for their concerns or objections as fully as possible;
19. Should note that failure to comply with the Code of Conduct can be used to justify a notice of concerns or objections for future parades.

Stage (Hurdle) No 4 - Notice of a protest meeting:
o The objector who has submitted a notice of concerns and objections can submit on a form a notice of protest meeting to the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests at the latest 18 working days before the day of the protest.

Stage (Hurdle) No 5 - Local dialogue:
o Maximum emphasis is placed on local contact and agreement in the early stages. The principle is that disputes ideally should be resolved by the parties involved as quickly and efficiently as possible. Face-to-face engagement will be the norm and encouraged as such.

The Parades Organiser:
20. If required, must agree with the objector that a third party chairs the informal discussion between the Parades Organiser and objectors;
21. Must fully justify the exceptional circumstances that prevent him from entering into engagement to the satisfaction of the Authority for Public Events Adjudication if he does not engage;
22. Should note that the Authority for Public Events Adjudication may take into account a refusal to enter into engagement;
23. Must verify the local agreement once it is reached and before he notifies it to the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests;
24. May choose with the agreement of the objector that a monitor be appointed by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication and must inform the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests about this.

Stage (Hurdle) No 6 - Mediation:
o If during the period of 10 working days after submission of the notification of concerns and objections form the issues have not been resolved, the process moves to mediation. Face-to-face engagement will be the norm and encouraged as such at this stage.

The Parades Organiser:
25. Should agree with the objector to choose a mediator from the list held by the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests;
26. Must fully justify any exceptional circumstances that prevent him from entering into face-to-face engagement to the satisfaction of the adjudication body if he refuses to engage;
27. Should note that refusal to take part in mediation may be considered by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication;
28. Should note that a monitor will automatically be appointed by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication to attend the parade if there is agreement on a resolution.

Stage (Hurdle) No 7 - Adjudication:
o If no agreement is reached 15 working days before the parade is due to take place the mediator will refer the dispute to the Authority for Public Events Adjudication along with a factual report on the mediation to date. Copies of the reports will be sent to the organiser and objector.

The Parades Organiser:
29. Should continue mediation while the dispute is considered by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication. If mediation produces a decision then the Authority stops considering the issue;
30. Has the right to know the case of the objector and is given an opportunity to respond;
31. Should comply with the requirements imposed by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication;
32. Should note that a monitor will automatically be appointed by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication where there has been a concern or objection lodged.

Stage (Hurdle) No 8 - Review of a panel decision:
o The Parades Organiser can appeal a decision taken by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication on the grounds of sufficiently relevant or significant evidence.

Stage (Hurdle) No 9 - Judicial review:
o A decision by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication may be questioned by way of judicial review, but it should be kept in mind that it is unlikely that the Courts will be willing to consider the merits of any decision by the Authority: judicial review is generally confined to procedural matters or points of law and even if a judicial review application is successful before the Courts, it is unlikely that a court would substitute its own decision for that of the Authority. Rather, it will send the matter back to the Authority to reconsider its decision in line with the directions of the Court on the points of procedure or law on which the Court has ruled.

Note also that most applications for judicial review against the current Parades Commission have been unsuccessful because the Courts have ruled that disputes over parades are matters for determination by the ‘expert body’ appointed by Parliament for the purpose and that the Courts should not intervene save for said errors of procedure or on points of law.

This provision for judicial review does not therefore provide a proper appeal against decisions of the Authority for Public Events Adjudication.

Stage (Hurdle) No 10 - The Parade takes place (subject to any restrictions agreed through mediation or imposed by the adjudication body):

The Parades Organiser:
33. Must encourage participants to show respect and tolerance and behave with due regard for the rights and traditions of others (music, words, behaviour, clothing and uniforms, flags);
34. Must note that anyone who breaches the requirements set by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication is guilty of an offence and liable to prosecution;
35. Should take measures to prevent any harassment including that on the grounds of religious belief or political opinion of any person in the vicinity of a parade, whether or not the person is participating in the parade;
36. Should ensure that he keeps a list of all those participating in the parade, including names and contact details for the persons responsible for each organisation;
37. Should make this list available to the PSNI on request;
38. Must ensure that the parade takes place in accordance with the details submitted to the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests;
39. Should ensure that changes agreed to through dialogue or mediation are complied with.
40. Should note that failure to comply with agreed changes is a breach of the Code of Conduct;
41. Should note that any failure to comply with requirements imposed by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication may render the organiser liable to prosecution for an offence under the legislation;
42. Should ensure that there are appropriate numbers of stewards for the parade;
43. Must give guidance and instruction to stewards on their role prior to the parade;
44. Should make every effort to ensure that all participants are informed of the terms of the Code of Conduct;
45. Should make clear to the participants that any failure to comply with the terms of the Code of Conduct could lead to them being excluded from future parades;
46. Should comply with any direction given by the PSNI where a public safety issue arises;
47. Should encourage participants to comply with directions regarding public safety;
48. Should ensure that no-one under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs is allowed to participate in the parade;
49. Should take all reasonable steps to facilitate the monitor’s access to the parade once he has been appointed;
50. The Parades Organiser should note that it is an offence to:

- Knowingly organise a parade for which notice has not been given;
- Knowingly organise a parade that differs from the terms notified to the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests;
- Fail to comply with the requirements imposed by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication;
- Prevent or disrupt a lawful public assembly;
- Harass persons taking part in a public assembly.

51. The Parades Organiser should also note that failure to comply with the Code of Conduct can be used to justify a notice of concerns or objections for future parades and may be taken into account by the Authority for Public Events Adjudication in future adjudications.

Stage (Hurdle) No 11 - Evaluation:
o The evaluation will be compulsory if the Authority for Public Events Adjudication has made a decision on the public parade. It must take place within 60 days of the date of the assembly. The meeting will be chaired by a listed mediator.

The Parades Organiser:
52. Should make every effort to attend the meeting convened by the Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests.

o The evaluation will be ‘voluntary’ if the dispute is resolved at either local dialogue or mediation stage. But note that an objector or the PSNI can request an evaluation and an evaluation meeting must then be held even if the Parades Organiser disagrees. The meeting will be chaired by a listed mediator.

The Parades Organiser, any objector or PSNI:
53. Can request an evaluation after the parade. The Office for Parades, Select Commemorations, and Related Protests must arrange the meeting within 60 days of the parade taking place.


Do not be deceived - Support THE ALTERNATIVE for
"Freedom of Peaceful Assembly in Northern Ireland"

A successful regulation process could be achieved provided that the new legislation applying to public assemblies is based on fundamental principles that conform to the European Convention on Human Rights. The seven principles are as follows:

1.The right to assembly only applies to peaceful assemblies, whether processions, static meetings and/or protests.
Under Article 11.1 of the ECHR, “everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly”. The Convention clearly excludes any form of violent assembly or any assembly organised in support of any violent message. Any such violent procession, meeting or protest is unlawful and must not be authorised or tolerated by State authorities. The regulation process should first deal with the prohibition of violent assemblies.
2. The regulation mechanism applied by State authorities must not constitute an interference with the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.
The European Convention proclaims that: “everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly”. This right is acknowledged and guaranteed to everyone who is peaceful in intent and practice and there is no requirement in a democratic society to seek permission from a public authority to exercise it or to have to make a case as to why it should be permitted. However, the European Court has recognised that the State may enforce a notification mechanism in the public interest to prohibit violent assemblies and impose restrictions on peaceful assemblies if necessary.
3. The duty of the State is to protect the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.
The duty of the State authorities is to protect the right to freedom of peaceful assembly of those who wish to exercise this right peacefully. The European Court also stated that in a democracy the right to counter-demonstrate cannot extend to inhibiting the exercise of the right to demonstrate. In the case of a violent counter-protest, it is the duty of the State authorities to ensure that the right to freedom of peaceful assembly of those who process or assemble is still effectively exercised.
4. Voluntary engagement.
The Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland has indicated that engagement cannot be understood as an obligation for the public procession organiser to engage in face-to-face dialogue with so-called representatives of the local section of the community. Engagement is and must remain simply an option that the public procession organiser is able to avail of.
5. Restrictions may be imposed on the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly provided they are prescribed by law, have a legitimate aim and are necessary in a democratic society (ECHR Article 11.2).
Restrictions can only be imposed on the right to freedom of peaceful assembly if it is peaceful; a violent assembly in intent or practice should simply be prohibited. Any restriction imposed by a public authority must conform to the prescription of Art. 11.2. of the European Convention. If the public assembly organiser is to take measures which amount to self-imposed restrictions, these should conform to the same provisions of Art. 11.2.
6. Prohibition of any actions aimed at the destruction of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly (ECHR Article 17).
This important provision of the European Convention prevents public authorities, organisations or individuals from engaging in activities using rights and freedoms, such as the right to private and family life, with the view of destroying or limiting the rights of others in an unnecessary or disproportionate manner. As soon as an organisation or individual engages in such an activity with the aim of destroying the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, they lose the benefit of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention.
7. The review by a higher independent body.
The regulation mechanism should include a regulation body that makes the initial decision and another, independent body empowered to deal with review requests. Once this remedy has been availed of, an application for judicial review could then be made.

Support this alternative



THE ALTERNATIVE for
Victims of Terrorism in Northern Ireland

A proper alternative for the victims of terrorism in particular must be based on principles and procedures that ensure that justice is done for all the people of Northern Ireland. The three steps recommended for implementation are as follows:

1. The first step is to acknowledge that whatever grievance some sections of the community may have had in the past, nobody should ever have had recourse to terrorism.
The 30 plus year (and continuing) campaign of terrorism in Northern Ireland, across the rest of the United Kingdom and in the Republic of Ireland has caused many civilians, security forces personnel, members of the judiciary and of parliament to be murdered or seriously injured, and these victims deserve to see justice done.

2. The second step is to acknowledge that there are different categories of victims resulting from the campaign of terrorism and from the measures taken by law enforcement officers to prevent and repress those engaging in terrorist activities.
The overwhelming majority of victims are the real victims of terrorism. Other victims including those resulting from the illegal or excessive use of force by law enforcement officers should also be recognised. The identification of the various categories of victims will enable the specific social and emotional needs of each category of victims to be efficiently addressed.

3. The third step is to ensure that the four investigation mechanisms already in place continue to operate efficiently, while constantly developing their ability to better identify, arrest and prosecute those responsible for crimes committed in the past.
a. The Historical Enquiries Team (HET) is part of the PSNI and is directly answerable to the Chief Constable. Its responsibility is to re-examine all deaths, particularly of victims of terrorism, that occurred between 1968 and 1998. The HET is presently reviewing its internal procedures according to the recommendations made by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC). As soon as this is completed, it will resume its investigating work. The HET seeks to involve the relatives of victims who can direct their queries to the team carrying out the review. Whenever evidential opportunities are found, the HET can refer the case to the PSNI, which may lead to criminal proceedings being undertaken by the Public Prosecution Service.
b. The Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland (PONI) carries out investigations into historical cases of unresolved murders that occurred during the terrorist campaign if police conduct was not consistent with the approved standards or allegedly in breach of the law. Cases may be referred by the HET or complaints lodged by individuals. At the end of the investigation, the Police Ombudsman issues a report.
c. The Attorney General for Northern Ireland has been given the power to direct new inquests into deaths which happened in the past. He has a large degree of discretion. The test imposed by law has a low threshold and considering what is submitted to him he may consider new inquests advisable.
d. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland may establish new processes with the view of ensuring that the truth is revealed as regards historical cases. In addition, cooperation between investigative authorities in Northern Ireland and public authorities investigating historical cases in the Republic of Ireland can be further developed.

Conclusion: These various bodies and authorities, while independent from one another, specialise in the investigation of the various issues related to historical cases. These must be preserved and constantly improved so as to ensure that the truth is established and justice is done for all victims and particularly the victims of terrorism.

Support this alternative



THE ALTERNATIVE for
Flags and Emblems of the State in Northern Ireland

The people of Northern Ireland, forming one community, have reaffirmed in the referendum of 1998 that Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom, in compliance with the principle of self-determination recognised by Articles 1 and 55 of the Charter of the United Nations (1945) and Article 1 of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Therefore it should be acknowledged that:

1. The constitutional status of Northern Ireland is provided in Section 1(1) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 which states: “It is hereby declared that Northern Ireland in its entirety remains part of the United Kingdom and shall not cease to be so without the consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland voting in a poll.”

2. The national flag and emblems are an expression of the authority of the State and by virtue of this authority the fundamental rights of the different sections of the community of the people of Northern Ireland are acknowledged, protected and promoted.

3. In a democratic society and in compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights, the display of any flag, bunting or emblems in Northern Ireland, that are an expression of a violent culture must be prohibited.

4. The display of the United Kingdom Flag and Emblems in Northern Ireland should be founded on the following principles:

a. Northern Ireland in its entirety is legally part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland;

b. The people living in Northern Ireland constitute one community, within which there are various sections;

c. The national flag and emblems express the legal status, sovereignty and authority of the State of the United Kingdom, which guarantees the existence and promotion of fundamental rights that apply to all members of the community in Northern Ireland;

d. The Union flag and emblems must be allowed to be displayed in all public buildings and grounds for the expression of the legal status, sovereignty and authority of the State and for the commemoration of national historical events;

e. The display of flags, emblems and bunting which are an expression of violent cultures must be prohibited in all public places in Northern Ireland.

CONCLUSION
For the good of society there are alternatives to the Haass proposals that can be chosen by the people of Northern Ireland in order to protect and promote fundamental freedoms to peaceful assembly, religion and expression; to improve existing investigating mechanisms; to secure justice, particularly for the victims of terrorism; and to maintain the flags and emblems of the State in Northern Ireland, which is by law in its entirety part of the United Kingdom. The alternatives proposed in this document are presented for your serious consideration and support.

Support these alternatives for
Parades, the Past and Flags and Emblems