Ms Susan Fay:

I wish to commend the Seanad on taking the initiative in holding these hearings. As part of my role in the Irish Traveller Movement law centre and in the ICCL steering group which is examining Ireland's compliance or otherwise with the ICCPR, it is wonderful to see the Seanad taking leadership in this matter.
I will speak as a solicitor in the Irish Traveller Movement law centre, about the advice I give people and the issues created as a result of the failure on the part of the State to recognise Travellers as an ethnic minority group. Following on from what was set out in the written submission, ethnicity denial effectively creates, ironically, a two-tier equality system. This means that in reality, there are ethnic and racial groups who are automatically protected by international human rights and equality directives and then there are ethnic groups such as the Irish Traveller community which are not protected. This was clearly demonstrated by the fact that Travellers were not included in the Bill that became the Equal Status Act 2000. As a result of significant lobbying on the part of the Irish Traveller Movement and other NGOs, Travellers were included but initially they were excluded from that legislation. Similarly, Travellers were not included in the first incitement to hatred Bill 1989 but as a result of lobbying, Travellers were subsequently included. Significant resources were used by NGOs in ensuring that Travellers were included in that legislation when, in our opinion, Travellers should be automatically included in human rights and equality legislation.
The failure to recognise Travellers as an ethnic minority group, despite the fact that it is widely accepted that Travellers are a de factoethnic minority group, renders Travellers' human rights and equality as prescribed by international treaties subject to domestic political whim. If history has taught us anything, it has taught us that such a position is dangerous and inconsistent with good human rights practice.
I note in the State's 2012 report under ICCPR at paragraph 794 that the State attempts to justify ethnicity denial by pointing to the fact that membership of the Traveller community is already considered a separate ground for the purposes of equality legislation. It is worth noting that in the law centre we encounter significant difficulties when we are attempting to advise clients on the effect of a particular provision or provisions in equality legislation. As many Senators will know, equality legislation was introduced in Ireland to comply with EU directives. In advising clients on the terminology used in domestic legislation which is implementing those European directives, it can often be necessary to rely on European jurisprudence. However, as Travellers are not recognised as an ethnic minority group, the rights of Travellers to rely directly upon the race directive or jurisprudence under the directive, can and has been challenged. While I note we have been asked to comment specifically on Articles 1 and 27, while we are discussing equality, compliance with Article 26 of the ICCPR - this provision relates to equality - it is important to note that this article is crucial in respect of the protection it provides to Travellers. The article is very broad. It states:

All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

I note that there is domestic equality legislation in place - the amended Equal Status Act.

Section 14 of the Equal Status Act 2000 is problematic in that it allows other legislation to override the effect of equality legislation, thus diluting the effectiveness of the legislation and leaving the protections under equality legislation subject to political whim.