Results 5,201-5,220 of 6,030 for speaker:Brendan Ryan

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I move amendment No. 4: In page 4, subsection (1), line 17, to delete "or a court". This amendment goes to the nub of the views expressed on the degree to which the European Convention on Human Rights will be incorporated into Irish law. The definition of "organ of the State", set out in page 4 of the Bill, specifically excludes, "the President or the Oireachtas or either House of the...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: We have managed to ramble a good deal on this issue but it is central to the Bill. I was taken by the Minister's description of the position in the United Kingdom. In the UK the judiciary is bound by an oath to the sovereign power, which is obliged to do whatever parliament says it can do. I share his dismissive view of the much vaunted British constitution. I have always believed that...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I am talking about Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the argument the Minister used about vertical and horizontal application.

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: The Minister said that the convention is primarily a vertically effective instrument, by which he meant that it is designed as a means of redressing human rights violations as between the individual and the state. The prohibition on slavery is not a matter between the individual and the state. It is not a prohibition on slavery implemented by the state but a prohibition on slavery per se,...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I return to one argument used by the Minister of State. The issue he raised about suing the courts could be dealt with by, among other things, the procedure that Senator Norris suggested. The other argument being used is that the convention is "a vertically effective instrument designed as a means of redressing human rights violations between the individual and the State." I raise the...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: The Commission on Human Rights is not happy with the procedures this Government is adopting. It would prefer a different procedure. Whatever the arguments, eminent members of and authorities from the legal profession take differing views, so it is clearly a matter of opinion as to which is the best route to take. I am resolved to remaining of the same opinion as that with which I started, so...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I move amendment No. 6: In page 4, before section 2, to insert the following new section: "2.–The Convention provisions shall be part of the law of the State.". This amendment is self-explanatory. It is a question of whether the convention is part of the law of the State and the amendment moves that it should be.

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: As the Minister of State said, this is the nub of the argument. He is not going to agree to this, which is a great pity, but I will deal with some of his arguments. What is singularly unimpressive is neither the goodwill of the Minister of State today, nor that of the Minister yesterday, but the fact that the arguments which are far from convincing are being drawn up to justify a position....

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I do not want to get into an argument with the Chair about potential charges on the Revenue, but subsection (5) states: proceedings under this section shall not be brought in respect of any contravention of subsection(1) which arose more than one year before the commencement of the proceedings. In other words, one must sue within a year of the alleged contravention.

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I move amendment No. 18: In page 6, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following new subsection: "(3) The registrar of the court concerned shall transmit a certified copy of an order containing a declaration of incompatibility to the Chief State Solicitor within 7 days of the perfection of the order.". The lawyers from whom I take advice indicate a slight gap in the process. Therefore,...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: Did I miss a reference to amendment No. 20?

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I will not argue with the Minister of State about amendment No. 18 which I am quite happy to withdraw. I take it that his undertaking is perfectly reasonable. However, I am not sure that unfinalised judicial decisions should be the basis for communicating with the Oireachtas. If a judicial decision is made in the High Court that something is incompatible with the convention and if the State...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I move amendment No. 19: In page 6, line 10, after "incompatibility" to insert "and, unless the declaration was made by the High Court and has been appealed, a statement as to the Government's proposals (if any) to address the incompatibility". One of the extraordinary points – the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform dealt with it on Second Stage – in respect of the Bill is that...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I do not want to waste time, but I invite the Minister of State to address section 5(2)(a) which states that, "A declaration of incompatibility . shall not affect the validity, continuing operation or enforcement of the statutory provision". Essentially, this means that even if the Supreme Court rules that an item of our law is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights we will...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: That is what it says.

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: In fact, it does not. When Senator Norris's case arose, we did not use the Constitution. Some people tried to argue that, but the view of the then Government and the then Fianna Fáil Minister was that it was nonsense. I believe it was nonsense. If somebody comes before the Supreme Court and obtains a ruling that what was done to them was done by legislation which is incompatible with the...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I move amendment No. 20: In page 6, line 12, to delete "making" and substitute "perfection". Question, "That the word proposed to be deleted stand", put and declared carried. Amendment declared lost.

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I move amendment No. 26: In page 6, between lines 30 and 31, to insert the following new subsection: "(6) Where as a result of an incompatibility between a statutory provision or rule of law and a Convention provision, or a failure to act in a manner compatible with a Convention provision, a person has been convicted of a criminal offence in circumstances where but for the incompatibility or...

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: The Minister of State should not underestimate our skills.

Seanad: European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001: Committee Stage. (19 Jun 2003)

Brendan Ryan: I appreciate complexity and I understand the complexity of this section, but that is no excuse for section 5(2)(a), which provides that the declaration of incompatibility shall not affect the validity, continuing operation or enforcement of the statutory provision or rule of laws in respect of which it is made. The wording is appalling. Essentially, this means that the while the declaration...