The Gazette 1973

of Irish domestic law : as we had accepted the laws of the Community, this concept of incorporation was nothing new. There was no inconsistency between the Human Rights enumerated in the Irish Constitution and those set out in the European Convention. It would then be easier for an Irish individual to enforce his rights in the domestic Courts of the Republic, instead of having to resort to Strasbourg. Mr. Justice Finlay also stressed that once an indivi- dual applicant had exhausted his domestic remedies and had got the Commission to agree to admit his case—which was the crucial test—from then on he should be granted legal aid, and his costs should be paid out of an international fund. We appear to be obsessed by the European Community to the extent that our rights and duties under the European Conven- tion of Human Rights have been overshadowed. Mr. Justice Philip O'Donoghue, the Irish Judge of the European Court of Human Rights, said that as he had discovered as a member of the Commission for seven years, and as a Judge for the last year, the impor- tance of the European Convention was precisely that specific rights were enumerated. This was not a new development, but had started with Magna Charta, and with the subsequent recognition of the writ of Habeas Corpus. What is called the Continental procedure of Habeas Corpus is now contained in Article 5 (4) of the Convention. There was no doubt but that the Conven- tion should be part of domestic law, particularly as many matters were already covered by existing law. It would not be necessary then for the applicant to exhaust all domestic remedies. When Ireland ratified the Con- vention in 1953 she was one of the few countries who did so without reference to any specified time: it was to be noted that neither Switzerland nor France had yet ratified the Convention. He emphasised how useful it would be if a more constant study of European institutions were undertaken in Irish universities. Mr. John Temple Lang, solicitor, stated that there was no doubt that some parts of the European Convention should be made part of the Irish Consti- tution so that they would be subject to judicial review : undoubtedly the subjective Minister's opinion under the 1940 Act would require to be re-considered; the right of privacy as well as many procedural rights arising from the Haughey case (1971 I.R.) deserve consideration. The provisions of the Convention should also be the basis for a far-reaching charter of Human Rights as envisaged by the White Paper on Northern Ireland. One of the deficiencies of the Convention ap- pears to be that nothing can prevent the philosophy of a particular religious denomination from being domi- nant in a particular State. There is no restriction in the Convention upon changing the laws of evidence. It should be clearly understood that the unsubstantiated police evidence permitted by the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1972 is a clear infringement of the Convention : there are also serious abuses of the Criminal Law under the Forcible Entry Act. The ques- tion of police brutality in the Republic was one of the gravest concern, and should be investigated. The new Government should undoubtedly adopt the Convention, so that eventually an all-Ireland Commission on Human Rights could be established. We should have joined the Scandinavian States in their indictment against Greece and bodies like Amnesty International should be allowed to bring cases against victims of dictatorial regimes. 149

should be obligatory for all the signatories and certainly for any new parties to the Convention. (3) The parties entitled to bring applications to the European Commission form at the moment too narrow a category. I would endorse the suggestion by Professor Rory O'Hanlon that certain international organisations should have the right to take cases before the Commis- sion without being victims of a breach themselves. The International Commission of Jurists and Amnesty Inter- national would be obvious candidates. (4) The European Convention would seem to have a part to play in the national situation. Since the White Paper on Northern Ireland has declared the intention of the British Government to grant a Charter of Human Rights to Northern Ireland, would it not be possible for the European Convention to form a common base for Human Rights in all parts of Ireland. Could there not be a Commission of Human Rights for Ireland com- posed of an equal number of judges from North and South, with if necessary, an independent chairman such as the judge of the European Court of Human Rights, to supervise the implementation of human rights in the country. This does seem to be the sort of co-operation in the context of European unity that would find accep- tance in both parts of Ireland. An appeal could lie to the organs of the Convention in Strasbourg. (5) I would advocate the establishment in the Oir- eachtas of a Human Rights Committee which would examine proposed legislation and see that it conformed with the standards required by our international obli- gations. This would be in line with the recommenda- tion of the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe last October. (6) There is a need for a European Ombudsman or Attorney-General for Europe who could initiate pro- ceedings before the European Commission on his own initiative and investigate the implementation by mem- bers of their obligations under the Convention. At pre- sent under Article 57 the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe may require an account from mem- ber States of their implementation of the provisions of the Convention. Though it has been used it does not seem to have realised its full promise and this might lend new life to it. The unwillingness to take pro- ceedings against Greece by some States is stressed. The spreading of information about the Convention should be maintained. It is surprising that Constitu- tional Law is not required by the Law Society in their examinations. The Law Society could sponsor a lecture on Human Rights. There are disturbing reports from Greece and Turkey about infringement of Human rights, and the Amnesty campaign against torture should be encouraged. Mr. Justice Thomas Finlay proposed the customary resolution that the best thanks of the Society are due to the Auditor. He said that the European Convention of Human Rights was an effective and meaningful multi-national binding agreement, which contained basic radical concepts. The concepts of an effective Court, and of the right of individual petition were new. There was a splendid new concept, by which any State could bring before the Commission breaches of human rights: thus the Scandinavian States had presented a well-documented case against Greece, which tried to fight back strenuously, but in the end left the Council of Europe. Mr. Justice Finlay thought that the European Con- vention of Human Rights should definitely form part