European Convention on Human Rights Seanad Éireann — 2026-03-05 ============================================================ Patricia Stephenson (SD), Labour Panel I welcome the Minister of State. It should be noted that twice in the past two weeks I have asked to speak to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade about this issue and the Department has not sent someone in, which is disappointing. In addition, this Commencement matter relates to the Department of justice, so there are actually six appropriate Ministers or Ministers of State who could have come to the House deal with it. I know that is nothing to with Deputy McConalogue, but I just wanted to put it on the record. It is incredibly frustrating and it suggests a lack of respect for the work that we do in this Chamber. The Irish Government and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade have historically been fair and balanced defenders of the European Convention on Human Rights, ECHR, which makes the total U-turn on the commitment to the ECHR last December deeply concerning and perplexing. When Ireland signed the joint statement to the Conference of Ministers at the Council of Europe it served to blur and totally muddy the waters on Ireland's position in relation to the ECHR. Many human rights groups including the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, ICCL and the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC are hugely worried about this quiet but insidious shift in Irish policy. The Minister for foreign affairs has often spoken about the importance of human rights and international law, with which I absolutely agree but the ECHR is fundamental to that framework. As I said two weeks ago, Ireland has brought two interstate cases against the UK on the grounds of ECHR Article 3 protections, including the torture of the hooded men in the North and the current case against the Tories' inhumane and cruel legacy Act. Linked to that, it is utterly appalling that a letter was signed by the Irish Government indicating support for changes to Article 3 protections. This would weaken our standards in respect of torture and inhumane and degrading treatment. The entire process around the political decision to support amending elements of the ECHR was done without any meaningful public debate. Relevant stakeholders like the IHREC, the ICCL, the Committee on the Administration of Justice, CAJ, NGOs and academics have been shut out of the dialogue relating to this issue. I am deeply concerned about the complete lack of transparency regarding this policy shift on the part of the Irish Government on the question of the universality of human rights. That is why I am particularly frustrated that twice in a fortnight I have raised this and nobody from the Department has come in to respond. That is because it points to questions of transparency and accountability. Next week, the Steering Committee for Human Rights, CDDH, will be taking dealing with the concluding stage of this. The latter is the final time Ireland can influence the text before it moves on to the next stage. The proposals put forward on the political declaration by Denmark, the UK and others are incredibly regressive in terms of the universality of human rights. They are also hugely concerning when it comes to the integrity of the Good Friday Agreement. Two weeks ago, I got a set-piece response from the Department regarding my question about whether a risk assessment was undertaken specifically in relation to the Good Friday Agreement before the December signing. Which political and civil society stakeholders did the Department meaningfully consult with as part of this risk assessment? I got no answer from the Department two weeks ago. I hope the Minister of State can give me an answer today. Many of our EU partners, including France, Germany and Spain, did not sign the joint declaration. Why did our Government choose not to align itself with those partners? We are living through utterly terrifying times in terms of global norms being ripped apart. During times of turbulence and polarisation, we need to hold on to the legal frameworks which underpin our self-proclaimed values of human rights and dignity. We are seeing complete existential threats to our human rights systems and state inconsistencies on issues of international law. Attempts to alter the ECHR represent a retreat from the concept of the universality of human rights. Does this Government believe that all people are born equal? That is a direct question. Does the Minister of State believe that we are all born equal or do he and the Government believe that some people deserve fewer rights? Does the Minister of State believe that we should materially alter our universal human rights standards in order to send a message to people that we are not, in fact, born equal? That is what this represents. The Government is campaigning for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council, UNHRC. How does pulling out of provisions of the ECHR framework look within that context? What is the Government's position in advance of the CDDH next week? Will it commit to protecting Article 3 and Article 8 rights? Will it practice what it preaches about upholding international law and human rights? Will it meet and consult with stakeholders like the IHREC and the ICCL next week in advance of that meeting and before Ireland's contributions to the steering committee? --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-03-05/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:44+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-03-05