Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill

I no longer understand what point the hon. Lady is trying to make. I was refuting a point that she made. She suggested that we had always argued that the NIHRC should have powers absolutely equal to—and, she suggested, only equal to—that of the Irish human rights commission, but we never made that argument. All we did was refute other arguments that she had made in the past. She said that the Paris principles should not extend to the NIHRC because it was not national in the sense that the Irish human rights commission was. We made the point that the Irish human rights commission and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission are both sourced in the Good Friday agreement. That was our point. Let me return to the sanctions applicable for failure to co-operate with the HRC when it exercises its investigatory powers. The penalty is merely level 5 on the standard scale, which is just £5,000. In reality, it might be easier for people or bodies simply to pay the fine, and not to bother co-operating with the Human Rights Commission’s investigation. The Government might well point out that the same rule applies to the UK Commission for Equality and Human Rights, established by the Equality Act 2006, but they will not be surprised to hear that, for the SDLP, that is no justification. That is especially true when the obstruction of an Equality Commission investigation in Northern Ireland under the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 can be treated as contempt. Equally, refusal to co-operate with an inquiry by an Assembly Committee carries a penalty of up to three months in prison. The same applies to inquiries established under the Health and Personal Social Services (Northern Ireland) Order 1972, which sets out the standard terms for any inquiry undertaken by Northern Ireland Departments. The same rule applies to the obstruction of Policing Board inquiries, and we believe that it should also apply to the obstruction of Human Rights Commission investigations. The fact that it will not do so represents a serious omission and a gross disparity. That is why amendment No. 19 provides for a penalty of up to three months’ imprisonment for obstructing a request for a person to give evidence or to supply information or papers. Equally, it is why amendment No. 23 would provide for a similar penalty for the obstruction of the Human Rights Commission’s powers of entry. Amendment No. 21 is designed to remove the massive exclusions in the Bill relating to the national security and intelligence services. If the intelligence services or others believe that divulging certain information would prejudice national security, they can refuse to do so. It would then fall to the Human Rights Commission to apply to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal to seek the information—some chance of that actually happening! The tribunal cannot consider the matter on its merits; it can apply only the judicial review standard. We know that the chances of success before the tribunal are absolutely minimal. For instance, of the 380 complaints heard by the tribunal to date under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, not one has succeeded and not once has any reason been given. No doubt we shall be told that the UK Commission on Equality and Human Rights does not have the power to investigate the security services, but, in the context of Northern Ireland, such a blanket exemption is unacceptable because, as Ministers have told us in Committee and elsewhere, the security services are playing a different and very distinct role in Northern Ireland compared with their position in Britain. This might matter less if the police ombudsman were able to investigate wrongdoing by MI5 officers in Northern Ireland, but the Government absolutely reject that possibility as well, even though the police ombudsman will have powers in respect of other UK agencies including the Serious Organised Crime Agency and—under forthcoming legislation—Revenue and Customs, where its work touches on policing matters. Given that the Government are removing aspects of intelligence policing from the reach of the key powers of the police ombudsman, we believe that it is entirely reasonable that the Human Rights Commission should be given some role in this area. That is why we have also tabled amendment No. 21.