27 May 1999 Edition
Is the Criminal Justice Review a done deal?
BY NED KELLY
With the media spotlight and public attention firmly focused on the Patten Commission on policing, the consultation process for the Criminal Justice Review has gone largely unheralded.
While the Patten public meetings in nationalist communities generated intense and emotive debate, there have been only 40 submissions to the justice review and the deadline was 28 May. As a central commitment in the Good Friday Agreement, the review has the potential to deliver major changes to a criminal justice system that is chronically open to political abuse and has been used systematically against nationalists over the years - so why the silence?
At a seminar organised by the Falls Community Council (FCC) in West Belfast last week some of the answers emerged.
The justice review, unlike the Patten Commission, is not independent. It is being conducted by NIO civil servants, `independent' assessors and by insiders from the criminal justice system - the very people responsible for implementing the past and present abuses. It is dominated by people who see themselves as professionals.
The consultation process is being described as a failure and Morrow Communications responsible for organising the consultation have shown themselves to be out of touch with people on the ground. For the recent 6 May criminal justice review event in the Balmoral Conference Centre, two members of staff from the FCC were only notified of the event the day before. When they turned up to the event it became apparent that representation from community groups was severely lacking. Patricia McCartney, one of the FCC representatives, described those present as having no understanding of the issues that directly affected people on the ground within nationalist communities - the people against whom the criminal justice system was used.
Ciaran Kearney, the FCC representative at the meeting, said: ``It raises serious questions about the inclusiveness and accessibility of this consultation process when representatives of many organisations, campaigns, and individuals from the nationalist community were not notified about an event that was organised to hear the views of the public.''
Asked the FCC: ``Will the appointment of judges be addressed? Will the way prosecutions have been handled in the past be examined? Will prosecutions be taken out of the hands of the RUC? Will there be a new inquest system, which for too long has been the only avenue left to the victims and survivors of state violence? What about the emergency powers, the abuse of Public interest immunity certificates (PIICs), the Diplock courts - all outside the remit of the criminal justice review? Will these be examined?''
With the media spotlight and public attention firmly focused on the Patten Commission on policing, the consultation process for the Criminal Justice Review has gone largely unheralded.
While the Patten public meetings in nationalist communities generated intense and emotive debate, there have been only 40 submissions to the justice review and the deadline was 28 May. As a central commitment in the Good Friday Agreement, the review has the potential to deliver major changes to a criminal justice system that is chronically open to political abuse and has been used systematically against nationalists over the years - so why the silence?
At a seminar organised by the Falls Community Council (FCC) in West Belfast last week some of the answers emerged.
The justice review, unlike the Patten Commission, is not independent. It is being conducted by NIO civil servants, `independent' assessors and by insiders from the criminal justice system - the very people responsible for implementing the past and present abuses. It is dominated by people who see themselves as professionals.
The consultation process is being described as a failure and Morrow Communications responsible for organising the consultation have shown themselves to be out of touch with people on the ground. For the recent 6 May criminal justice review event in the Balmoral Conference Centre, two members of staff from the FCC were only notified of the event the day before. When they turned up to the event it became apparent that representation from community groups was severely lacking. Patricia McCartney, one of the FCC representatives, described those present as having no understanding of the issues that directly affected people on the ground within nationalist communities - the people against whom the criminal justice system was used.
Ciaran Kearney, the FCC representative at the meeting, said: ``It raises serious questions about the inclusiveness and accessibility of this consultation process when representatives of many organisations, campaigns, and individuals from the nationalist community were not notified about an event that was organised to hear the views of the public.''
Asked the FCC: ``Will the appointment of judges be addressed? Will the way prosecutions have been handled in the past be examined? Will prosecutions be taken out of the hands of the RUC? Will there be a new inquest system, which for too long has been the only avenue left to the victims and survivors of state violence? What about the emergency powers, the abuse of Public interest immunity certificates (PIICs), the Diplock courts - all outside the remit of the criminal justice review? Will these be examined?''