Read on Twitter
So @_IHREC advised the Govt that any investigation should take place in a human rights and equality framework (in line with the Public Sector Human Rights & Equality Duty legislated for in 2014), and Govt 'did not opt' for that approach because of '....historical context'. https://twitter.com/_IHREC/status/1349279152634015744
We have seen this type of approach before, where human rights issues are cast as a contemporary concern, and irrelevant to the past. Yet many of the victims of abuse and their families are alive, and hold those human rights today, as they did then. Their human rights are not new.
Not only that, but the last homes didn't close till 1988. The idea that this 'history' is not to be considered in a human rights framework is baffling.
Those who did not survive also had human rights. Theirs are not new either.
At every stage of this system, there was evidence of abuse. There were responsibilities to prevent abuse, to preserve life, and to safeguard children. Those responsibilities are not new either. https://twitter.com/ConorUCCLaw/status/1349136210279731201?s=20
Moreover, the Public Sector Human Rights and Equality Duty (per IHREC Act 2014) places obligations on all functions of the state today, and that includes all functions it carries out now, regardless of whether their purview is historical.
There are very clearly concerns on equality grounds being expressed today - on gender, race, and disability - apart from the very significant socio-economic issues that illuminate the report.
On disabled persons experience of the investigation and report https://twitter.com/DisabilityFed/status/1349364186959249413?s=20
On the issue of racial discrimination, @AssocMRI @MixedRaceIrish spoke to UN Committee recently about their experience in Mother and Baby Homes https://twitter.com/drlucymichael/status/1201445423090671616?s=20
Here's the @AssocMRI response today to a report which they invested huge time and resources in (some despite ill health, advanced age, and difficult financial circumstances), in order to have their experiences acknowledged. https://twitter.com/AssocMRI/status/1349116099909062657?s=20
And on gender grounds... there is so much to say, but the patronising descriptions of women and the broadbrush descriptions of families and fathers which cover up the deep patriarchal system within which all were forced to deal with 'shame' leave much to be desired.
Gender is likely to be the key reason why the Commission was able to describe these human rights abuses as having a 'historical context' that doesnt warrant a human rights and equality framework, and that itself is directly an equality issue for today.
Just for context, the European Convention on Human Rights was first signed in 1950. Ireland was one of the original countries that signed it, in 1953.
Although the Convention was only brought into Irish law in 2003, nonetheless the Government acknowledged those human rights on its signing.
Many of the rights that are relevant don't even need to rely on international conventions, since they were already acknowledged in Bunreacht na hÉireann (the Irish Constitution), signed into law in 1937, including the right to life and the right to liberty.
