Archive

Author Archive

Moving to www.humanrights.ie

We are moving to humanrights.ie

The technical stuff is being done today so you may experience some disruption to your service – for example seeing the ‘old’ blog where you expected the new one. This should sort itself out within the next 12 hours.

Thanks for your patience.

Categories: Uncategorized

We Are Moving to humanrights.ie. Keep An Eye on Your Subscriptions!

We are about to make the move to www.humanrights.ie

This is a reminder to email subscribers and those of you who follow us on RSS to please check your subscription after the changeover as you may need to resubscribe. Facebook and Twitter subscribers will not be affected.

We will send a further message by RSS to from humanrights.ie once the changeover is complete. If you are an email or feed reader subscriber and you do not receive this second message within 24 hours, you definitely need to go to http://www.humanrights.ie and resubscribe.

The move to humanrights.ie should be complete in a few days but for now the (now closed) blog at humanrightsinireland.wordpress.com and the new blog at http://www.humanrights.ie will exist in parallel.

We’ll see you at the new site.

Categories: Uncategorized

Guest Post: Kieran Walsh on Forced Marriage and Child Abduction

We are pleased to welcome a third guest post from Kieran Walsh. In this post, Kieran continues Mairead’s discussion of forced marriage in the Republic and considers whether child abduction law could be used in Ireland to protect children from being forced into marriage. He argues, in particular, for a child-focused approach to child abduction, which would allow the relevant law to be deployed effectively even outside the realm of custody disputes.

The recent forced marriage decision in Northern Ireland raises some interesting, and perhaps interminable, problems for cross-border levels of compliance with children’s rights and child protection instruments. As outlined previously by Mairead, the Northern Ireland courts granted an order to under the Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007 which prevented two girls, aged 12 and 14, from travelling to Pakistan where they were to be married. Ireland has no similar means of protecting children from forced marriage.

Read more…

Symposium: Towards A Gender Recognition Framework for Ireland

Friday 14 May 2010

Brookfield Health Sciences Complex, U.C.C., Room G10, 10.30 a.m. to 2 p.m.

Speakers at the symposium include:

  • Prof. Andrew Sharpe, School of Law, Keele University
  • Prof. Stephen Whittle, School of Law, Manchester Metropolitan University (pictured above)
  • Ms. Eilís Barry, Barrister at Law
  • Mr. Michael Farrell, Solicitor, Free Legal Advice Centres; Irish Human Rights Commission
  • Ms. Tanya Ní Mhuirthile, Faculty of Law, University College Cork

Further information is available from Ms Noreen Delea, Faculty of Law, UCC, Cork Tel. (021) 490 2728.  E-mail: ccjhr@ucc.ie

For full details and a booking form for the symposium, see http://www.ucc.ie/en/ccjhr/fullstory,97981,en.html

This symposium forms part of an IRCHSS-funded project, Gender, Religious Diversity and Multiculturalism (PI: Dr. Siobhán Mullally, Law, UCC).

Delegate Fee: €20.00   CPD Points: 3 hours

Forced Marriage in the Republic of Ireland

I was asked yesterday to give a sense of the extent to which situations like that of G and D – the Northern Irish case of two young girls who were at risk of being forced by their parents into marriage in Pakistan which we wrote about here- are of relevance in the Republic.

I am not aware of any ‘G and D’ type cases which have come before our courts. As yet, forced marriage does not seem to be seen as a mainstream ‘family law’ or ‘women’s law’ issue in the way that it is in the UK and Northern Ireland. In 2007, the Minister for Health and Children stated in the Dail that she was satisfied ‘that all reasonable measures are in place to prevent forced marriages and to provide a remedy where full, free and informed consent is absent’. She referred to the law of nullity which allows a marriage to be set aside where it was contracted in the face of fear, duress, intimidation or undue influence. She noted that the criminal law provided several bases upon which violence used in the context of forcing another into marriage can be prosecuted. Read more…

The Female Genital Mutilation Act 2010?

April 21, 2010 7 comments

Today, Senator Ivana Bacik of Labour (pictured left) will be introducing a Bill to prohibit Female Genital Mutilation in the Seanad during the Labour Party’s private members’ time.  The Bill and its Explanatory Memorandum are available here. The Minister for Health and Children has welcomed the Bill, indicating that it will be read a second time in a year or so. Labour’s press release notes that FGM Bills were introduced by Labour TDs Liz McManus (see Bill here) and Jan O’Sullivan (see Bill here) in the Dail in 2009 and 2001. Senator Bacik has said:

We urgently need a law specifically criminalising this barbaric practice which has destroyed the lives of so many girls and women world-wide. I welcome the Minister’s commitment to address this issue, but there has already been a great deal of work done on developing a legal framework, and delaying the introduction of this legislation by another year is unacceptable.

Senator Bacik’s Bill would:

  • Introduce an offence of performing female genital mutilation on a woman or girl (note the gender-specific nature of the offence), the penalty for which shall be a fine or a term of imprisonment up to 14 years or both.
  • Have extra-territorial effect so that an Irish citizen or resident who performs FGM outside of Ireland still falls within the terms of the Act.
  • Rule out any defence of parental consent in the case of a minor.
  • Allow a medical defence where the procedure was performed by a registered medical practitioner who ‘honestly believed, on reasonable grounds, that the operation was necessary to safeguard the life or health of the woman or girl concerned or to correct a genital abnormality or malformation’.

The Bill appears, to some extent, to take its cue from the UK Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003. In that jurisdiction, the legislation has fallen at the prosecution hurdle, and thus appears to have largely symbolic and perhaps deterrant value. For open-access articles which critique the UK legislation see this study by Sadiya Mohammad on the legislation’s efficacy and this article by Moira Dustin and Anne Phillips which considers the legislation in the broader context of UK law-making in the general area of women + gender + culture.

Read more…

G and D: The Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007 in Northern Ireland

April 20, 2010 1 comment

In November of last year the Ministry for Justice reported that some 86 forced marriage protection orders were made in the first year of operation of the Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007 (see the Guardian on the shortcomings of the order scheme here).

Last month, in the case of G and D (Risk of Forced Marriage: Forced Marriage Protection Order) [2010] NIFam 6 (26 March 2010),  Stephens J. examined these orders in what appears to be Northern Ireland’s first major case under the Act. The judgment is available on BAILII and the Belfast Telegraph reports here. G and D are sisters of Pakistani Muslim descent living in Northern Ireland. They are aged 12 and 14 and have 4 older brothers. When the girls were aged 10 and 11, a Trust, as the judgment has it:

brought wardship proceedings on the basis that the parents had arranged for G and D to travel to and remain for a number of years in Pakistan so that they could be educated in that country. The Trust alleged that this was a pretext, that no arrangements had been made for their education [The relevant facts are set out at [42]-[57]] and in reality, based in part on the previous experience of the forced marriages of their brothers S and T [now in their 20s] in 2005, [the High Court had determined in the course of wardship proceedings brought in respect of T in 2006 that he had indeed been forced to marry. The circumstances of his religious marriage ceremony are described at [31]-[41]] that once in Pakistan they were to be isolated, attended to and prepared so that they also could be forced  to marry… . The Trust also contend[ed] that the parents either chose to ignore the distinction between a forced and an arranged marriage or have no insight into the emotional and physical pressures that they have applied in the past and for instance still apply in a different context in relation to [their son] U [who had been excluded from the family home for refusing to obey rules established by the mother]. [Their sons U and V had visited Pakistan without being forced to marry].

Read more…

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 32 other followers