Former Ulster Unionist Minister Dermot Nesbitt accused
the commission of human rights of "meddling"
in affairs outside the remit at the expense of establishing
a bill of human rights for North Ireland.
He stated the commission should instead undertake
an investigation on what rights they have and how
well they are covered.
Mr. Nesbitt also stated Mr. Dickson was unable to
tell me what rights the people of Northern Ireland
were actually being denied. I am sure that Mr. Nesbit
doesn't need the commission to tell him that. Human
rights can be explained in dictionaries that he can
read for himself.
To quote just a few:
Freedom from unlawful imprisonment, torture and
execution regarded as belonging fundamentally to
The basic rights and freedoms to which all humans
are entitled often held to include the right to
life, liberty, freedom of thought and of expression
and equality before the law.
rights is the right of every person has to justice
I guess Mr. Nesbitt being of the unionist persuasion
just sees this from their point of view and not from
the Catholics, republicans and Nationalists who have
endured life outside of these freedom of human rights.
I can't understand how a person can say the Human
Rights Commission is "meddling" in affairs
when every dog on the street, every cat in the ally
knows that basic human rights have been denied "certain"
people in the North of Ireland for years.
Mr. Nesbit also said "the lack of a bill of rights"
showed the commission has failed to actually do the
work it was required to do.
I take this to say that the lack of a bill of rights
means that the people of North Ireland have no bill
of rights or is it just a "select" few who
have been denied these rights for countless years?
Barbara Green, Jim J. Kane
Free River Irish
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives