By David Thompson

Copyright newsletter

NIHRC’s chief commissioner caused controversy during the summer after comments slamming the arrangements for the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR). Alyson Kilpatrick suggested its lead investigator can’t be independent because of his previous role in the the RUC. The comments prompted criticism from unionist political parties, and questions about whether other NIHRC’s commissioners backed the view. After weeks of silence, the commission has published a new report setting out its response. It says commentary by Ms Kilpatrick has “focused on the statutory role” of the ICRIR Commissioner for Investigations (CfI). It says this was “expressly not personal as it was directed at whether it was tenable for the single role of CfI to be discharged by a former senior RUC officer who served during the period under consideration. This is not based upon the competence, ability, integrity, professionalism, or previous conduct of the person appointed to the office”. Jamie Bryson, who is involved in legal action against the commission over the row, says the “dubious ‘human rights’ arguments put forward are really political arguments” – accusing the Chief Commissioner of claiming “for herself the role of ‘official spokesperson’”, which he says has no basis in law. Mr Bryson said NIHRC has provided “an elaborate explanation as to how all Commissioners are bound into NIHRC decisions made, including those determined by [a] ‘casting vote’, which seemingly indicates there is serious division within the Commission on Ms Kilpatrick’s political campaigning”. NIHRC did not deny that its commissioners were divided on the issue, but said that it “operates on a basis of collective responsibility”. A spokesperson said: “The Commission has a statutory mandate to keep under review the adequacy and effectiveness in NI of law and practice relating to the protection of human rights and provide advice on measures which ought to be taken to protect human rights. The Commission’s positions are based on the legal obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights and the treaty obligations under the COE and UN systems which the UK Government has ratified. “The legacy report represents the Commissions long-standing position”.