Other

Letter: Parliament can do what it wants when unionist rights are at risk but it would be ‘unlawful’ if it put at risk rights dear to Irish nationalists

By Letters

Copyright newsletter

Letter: Parliament can do what it wants when unionist rights are at risk but it would be 'unlawful' if it put at risk rights dear to Irish nationalists

Parliament can do what it wants unless it upsets Irish nationalists Quite often these days we are seeing arguments that some Westminster legislation is or would be ‘unlawful’ because of its conflicting with some previous legislation which is deemed to have a constitutional character. This is puzzling, because when Jim Allister, Ben Habib and others took a case to the Supreme Court in 2023, they were told something quite different. You will recall that they argued that the Acts of Union had a constitutional character and the Northern Ireland Protocol/Windsor Framework was in conflict with that legislation in so far as it impeded unfettered trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The Supreme Court judges ruled: “The suspension, subjugation, or modification of rights contained in an earlier statute may be effected by express words in a later statute. The most fundamental rule of UK constitutional law is that Parliament, or more precisely the Crown in Parliament, is sovereign and that legislation enacted by Parliament is supreme.” (p.20-21) That is clear enough. Parliament is sovereign. It can do what it wants. If its latest legislation conflicts with earlier laws, whether they are deemed constitutional or not, that is too bad. We can just take it that rights outlined in the earlier laws have been suspended, subjugated or modified. That is what we were told when unionist rights were under consideration. Now that ‘rights’ more dear to the hearts of nationalists are under threat, we are told that the new legislation would be ‘unlawful’. Strange that, isn’t it? Dr Paul Kingsley, Belfast BT4 Bad BBC NI journalism Good journalism is always inquiring, challenging and holds those in power to account, while Bad journalism is supine and passive. BBC NI lack of coverage of the memorial to remember the 50th anniversary of the Tullyvallen Orange Hall sectarian murders is a case of Bad journalism. Sinn Fein would want us to believe that there was no alternative to such barbarism and they don’t want to be asked to justify the Tullyvallen massacre or other IRA murders. The supine and passive attitude of BBC NI to that SF narrative inevitably leads to editorial decisions such as not to report on the Tullyvallen Memorial and is Bad journalism and poor editorial judgment. Gerry Cullen, Independent Left, Dungannon, head As well reported in this newspaper, the Irish Guards’ celebration of the regiment’s 125th anniversary was a delight to behold in Bangor and Carrickfergus. A glorious spectacle of colour made all the more vibrant by the great weather. It is a sad outcome of our unionist politicians’ constant yielding to nationalist pressures that, due to our flags legislation, the parading troops could only be photographed against a background of Carrickfergus Castle without the Union Flag or the Order of St Patrick flying from the keep. More shameful stripping of our heritage. Cliff Cardwell, Co Londonderry