: Latest News

A human rights organisation is challenging comments made by the Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ) during a sitting of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee at Westminster.

Ulster Human Rights Watch Advocacy Service (UHRW-AS) described evidence provided by the Deputy Director of the CAJ on the definition of a victim of terrorism as ‘disingenuous’.

The CAJ’s Daniel Holder claimed that a definition drafted by UHRW, submitted to the NIO during the recent Legacy Consultation exercise, would effectively exempt in law all victims of the state including a child killed by a plastic bullet fired by the security forces.

UHRW Advocacy Support Manager, Axel Schmidt, has written to the Chair of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, Simon Hoare MP, to clear up any misunderstanding “as to the accurate meaning and interpretation that should be given to the UHRW definition of a victim of terrorism.”

Mr Schmidt set out how the definition applied to victims killed or injured as a result of finding themselves close to an act of terrorism being committed or being wrongly associated with an act of terrorism being committed.

In his letter, Mr Schmidt said: “The purpose of this paragraph, which is an integral part of the definition of victim of terrorism, is to deliberately include innocent people, such as a child killed as a result of the use of force by security forces, contrary to what Mr Holder asserted before the members of the Committee.

“I have to state that the Ulster Human Rights Watch (UHRW) totally refutes the comments made by Mr Holder before the Committee as being disingenuous.”

In a separate comment, Mr Schmidt added: “There has been a misreading or misinterpretation of the UHRW position and this is unfortunate. It conveys a mistaken impression of the definition of a victim of terrorism proposed by the Ulster Human Rights Watch and I believe it is important to set the record straight.”

Mr Schmidt re-states UHRW’s willingness to appear before the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee to set out the work that is being done by the Advocacy Service of the Ulster Human Rights Watch on behalf of victims and survivors of terrorism and the position it holds on controversial legacy proposals.

A human rights body is warning that thousands of victims of terrorism in Northern Ireland will be denied any meaningful justice if proposed legacy arrangements are not fundamentally changed.
Ulster Human Rights Watch (UHRW) is calling for a complete re-think in order to provide closure for as many victims and survivors as possible.
UHRW Advocacy Manager, Axel Schmidt, said: “These proposals, as they are currently constructed, are totally out of balance. They attempt to do the impossible by squaring a circle to placate people who are not victims and survivors, but perpetrators of terrorist actions.
“There is genuine concern amongst those innocent victims who have suffered, and still suffer, as a result of terrorist attacks which have caused so many needless deaths and life-changing injuries.
“This is an issue where you cannot equivocate or be indifferent. There may be a desire in some quarters to be neutral in order to assist the political process, but neutrality on this sensitive issue merely serves to re-traumatise victims.
“Victims of terrorism must not be dealt with in some sickening way to placate or meet a political demand or political agreement.
“Ulster Human Rights Watch is calling for what is right and equitable for victims of terrorism and survivors. The bomber or gunman, or those who assisted them in carrying out their brutal acts, can in no way be regarded as being in the same category as the people they murdered or maimed or those left bereaved.
“The Government must acknowledge the mistake it is making with these proposals and undertake a fundamental review before the process goes any further. An essential first step in this process must be a workable, legal and meaningful definition of a victim and survivor, and not one which at the moment seeks to turn justice on its head.
“Ulster Human Rights Watch acknowledges there may be limited prospects of delivering convictions for some past crimes, but that should not be compounded by insulting those who have done nothing to warrant such shoddy treatment.”

Article by Axel Schmidt-Published in the Belfast Newsletter 09/09/19

The recommendation brought forward recently by Commissioner for Victims and Survivors, Judith Thompson, that terrorists injured by their own violence should be included in pensions for troubles victims, has brought widespread condemnation from innocent victims and the organisations representing them, including Ulster Human Rights Watch. Indeed we have been vocal and clear in expressing this concern in the media and, most recently, during our meeting with NIO Minister of State, Nick Hurd MP, when we also stressed our lack of faith in government assurances on this matter, which have yet to be enshrined in legislation.

Unfortunately the position taken by Judith Thompson, while being morally indefensible, sadly is legally defensible. This is because (up to the present moment) no distinction has been made in Northern Ireland at statutory level between innocent victims of terrorist violence, and perpetrators of the same violence, who while attempting to commit mass murder may have hurt themselves in the process.

And this brings us to the crux of the matter: the legislation – namely the Victims and Survivors (Northern Ireland) Order 2006, which provides the statutory interpretation of a victim in the Troubles context. This is a legal interpretation that stands alone globally in failing to recognise the moral dimension of victimhood, and the need for victims to be acknowledged as distinct and treated differently to the psychopathic terrorists who inflicted their suffering.

In fact, it is not only inconsistent with international norms, significantly it is inconsistent with other UK legislation, including the Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2015, which brought into force EU Directive 2012/29/EU, which establishes minimum standards on the rights, support, and protection of victims of crime, and to which all UK legislation, including the offending 2006 Order, should conform.

So at the root of all this, victims of terrorism have been granted a statutory victim definition which is not fit for purpose, and which is uniquely appalling. Commissioner Thompson has, unsurprisingly, now brought forward pension proposals in line with this approach and understandably the instant reaction to these recommendations  has been for many organisations to publicly turning their fire on Commissioner Thompson, and demand her resignation.

We fully agree that Commissioner Thompson is rightly due criticism, not least for failing to recognise or to articulate effectively the legitimate disgust of victims of terrorism on being categorised together with murderers and criminals. She has also  failed to advocate for the necessary review of Article 3 of the Victims and Survivors (Northern Ireland) Order 2006, to achieve a definition of victims and survivors that complies with the definition of victim of crime provided in the Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2015 and EU Directive 2012/29/EU.

However, as Commissioner Thompson’ s contract now comes to an end (and it is unlikely that she will be reappointed for a further term, due to the obvious loss of confidence in her position by so many victims and survivors), we believe the emphasis must continue to be focused on attacking the ‘interpretation’ of ‘victim and survivor’ in the 2006 Order, and that innocent victims of terrorism focus every effort to achieve real change by campaigning to see the reform of the Victims and Survivors (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 by bringing it into conformity with the rest of the legislation in the UK and the EU directive.

Achieving reform of the Statutory Instrument 2006 would ensure any present or future Commissioner’s representations and recommendations would have to reflect a true and accurate definition of victims and survivors – perpetrators NOT included – and that is where our focus must and will remain.

Published in the Newsletter 29/08/2019. Click here to view.