242 / 294
Irish Complaint before European
Commission in Strasbourg
Here is the text of the statement issued by the European
Commission of Human Rights.
On October 1st, 1972, the European Commission of
Human Rights decided after hearings of the parties
which took place in Strasbourg from September 25 th to
29th, 1972, that certain parts of the application sub-
mitted by the Government of Ireland under Article 24
of the European Convention on Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms were inadmissable, but admitted
certain other parts of that application for further inves-
tigation without in any way prejudging its opinion as
to whether or not the complaints concerned showed a
violation of the Convention.
The Commission first noted that, as the result of an
undertaking given by the British Government to
the effect that there would be no prosecutions of offen-
ces under the Northern Ireland Act, 1972, for acts or
omissions which occurred prior to the enactment of that
Act, the Government of Ireland have withdrawn their
application, submitted under Article 7 of the Conven-
tion, in relation to that Act. The Commission therefore
decided to strike this application off their list of cases.
The Commission then declared inadmissible the Irish
Government's complaint under Article 2 (right to
life) of the Convention (the causing by the security
forces of deaths in Northern Ireland in August and
October 1971 and in Deny on January 30th,
1972) that there has been on the part of the British
Government an administrative practice failing to pro-
tect the right to life. The Commission found that no
such practice had been established by the Irish
Government and that therefore the deaths concerned
would have to be examined individually and not as
examples of a practice and it would have to be shown
by the Irish Government that the domestic reme-
dies available in Northern Ireland had been exhausted
in each case (Article 26). The Commission, however,
found that the Irish Government had now shown
this to be the case and that, therefore, this part of the
application was inadmissible.
Methods of interrogation to be further investigated
The
Commission
then
considered
the
Irish
Government's allegation that the methods of interro-
gation of persons detained and interned violated Art. 3
of the Convention and that such methods amounted to
an administrative practice.
The British Government denied that there was,
or had been, any treatment of detained or interned
persons in a manner contrary to Article 3 and it then
submitted that certain techniques of interrogation pre-
viously authorised had been discontinued.
The Commission found that the treatment com-
plained of, particularly the methods of interrogation,
did constitute an administrative practice and called for
further investigation in connection with Article 3.
Furthermore, the Commission declared admissible the
allegations of the Irish Government concerning
internment without trial and detention as carried out
in Northern Ireland under the Civil Authorities (Special
Powers) Act, 1922, and the regulations made under it.
In this connection the Commission considered the
British Government's notices of derogation under
Article 15 of the Convention and also noted that both
parties agreed that a public emergency existed within
the meaning of Paragraph (1) or Article 15. The ques-
tion remained whether the measures taken by the
British Government in connection with detention and
internment exceeded the limits under Paragraph (2) of
Article 15 in that they were not strictly required by the
exigencies of the situation. The Commission found that,
in accordance with its established practice, this question
could not be decided at the admissibility stage but
should be made the subject of an examination on the
merits. The Commission accordingly admitted the mat-
ters relating to internment and detention in connection
with Articles 5 (the right to liberty), 6 (right to fair
hearing in determination of civil rights), and 15.
Internment exercised with discrimination
The
Commission
next
considered
the
Irish
Government's allegations that the detention and intern-
ment power were exercised with discrimination on the
grounds of political opinion and were thus a breach of
Article 14 of the Convention (which prohibits discrim-
ination on various grounds). The Commission here
found that these allegations under Article 14, with
respect to the right guaranteed under Articles 5 and 6,
in conjunction with Article 15, were admissible.
The Commission finally considered the Irish
Government's allegation that the administrative prac-
tices referred to also constituted a violation of Article 1
of the Convention, which provides that "the high con-
tracting parties shall secure to everyone within their
jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section 1
of this convention". The Commission decided to reserve
to an examination of the merits the issue whether there
was any breach of Article 1 of the Convention. This
part of the application is, therefore, also admitted.
The Commission's decision, which will be published
in due course, will summarise the parties' arguments
and explain further the reasons of the Commission's
decision.
The Commission has now under Article 28 to estab-
lish the facts of the case and to put itself at the disposal
of the parties with a view to securing a settlement. It
will first invite the Irish and then the British
Government to submit their written observations on the
merits of the admitted complaints and will later decide
on its further procedure.
STRASBOURG CASE ADMI TTED
Human Rights Commission to take up Complaints
against Britain
The European Human Rights Commission yesterday
admitted five of the seven charges brought by the
Government against Britain to further investigation,
including one which will determine whether the meas-
ures taken by the British Government under the Special
Powers' Act—among them internment—were strictly
required by the situation.
- 2 4 6