Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T00:16:11.917Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Northern Ireland Peace Process and the War against Terrorism: Conflicting Conceptions?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Abstract

Preserving Northern Ireland's peace process in the midst of a war against international terrorism has presented the British government with a series of dilemmas at the level of political rhetoric, policy-making and legislation. The peace process demands adherence to human rights standards to provide a foundation for the new political dispensation, while an implication of the necessity for a war against terrorism is that restrictions on liberty are justifiable in the name of security against the backdrop of the existence of an emergency. These conflicting conceptions for addressing political violence at the national and international level are addressed.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 See, for example, Martin Mansergh, ‘The Background to the Irish Peace Process’, in Michael Cox, Adrian Guelke and Fiona Stephen (eds), A Farewell to Arms?: Beyond the Good Friday Agreement, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2006, pp. 24–40.Google Scholar

3 On his reply to critics of the view that the end of the Cold War played a role in the peace process, see Michael Cox, ‘Rethinking the International and Northern Ireland: A Defence’, in Cox et al., A Farewell to Arms, pp. 427–42.Google Scholar

4 The typology was first developed by the author for a book on policing and public order. See John D. Brewer, Adrian Guelke, Ian Hume, Edward Moxon-Browne and Rick Wilford, The Police, Public Order and the State, 2nd edn, Basingstoke, Macmillan, 1996, especially pp. 230–4.Google Scholar

5 Campbell, Colm and Connolly, Ita, ‘A Model for the “War Against Terrorism”? Military Intervention in Northern Ireland and the 1970 Falls Curfew’, Journal of Law and Society, 30: 3 (September 2003), pp. 341–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarThey conclude: ‘The experience suggests that use of a “war” model in the face of complex public-order problems, political violence and terrorism risks providing short-term gains at the expense of long-term damage’ (p. 374).

6 This was based on the wartime Defence of the Realm Act 1914.Google Scholar

7 Quoted in Michael Farrell, Northern Ireland: The Orange State, London, Pluto Press, 1980, p. 93.Google Scholar

8 See, for example, Kevin Kelley, The Longest War: Northern Ireland and the IRA, Dingle, Brandon, 1982, p. 100.Google Scholar

9 Disturbances in Northern Ireland: Report of the Commission appointed by the Governor of Northern Ireland (Cameron Report) (Cmnd 532), Belfast, HMSO, 1969, p. 73.Google Scholar

10 Report of the Advisory Committee on Police in Northern Ireland (Hunt Report) (Cmnd 535), Belfast, HMSO, 1969.Google Scholar

11 See, for example, the account of the archival material in The Irish Times, 2 January 1972.Google Scholar

13 The extent to which the new legislation replicated considerable parts of the Special Powers Act is analysed in a major work on the law on terrorism in the United Kingdom, Laura K. Donohue, Counter-Terrorist Law and Emergency Powers in the United Kingdom, 1922–2000, Dublin, Irish Academic Press, 2000, especially the chapter on ‘Special Powers Re-Named: Direct Rule and the Transfer of Emergency Powers 1972–73’, pp. 117–55.Google Scholar

14 A contemporary account of this shift emphasized the difference between army and police methods in dealing with political violence. See Kevin Boyle, Tom Hadden and Paddy Hillyard, Ten Years on in Northern Ireland: The Legal Control of Political Violence, London, The Cobden Trust, 1980, pp. 24–36.Google Scholar

15 From the text of the Framework Documents of 22 February 1995, quoted in Cox et al., A Farewell to Arms?, p. 505.Google Scholar

16 From the text of the Belfast Agreement of 10 April 1998, quoted in Cox et al., A Farewell to Arms?, p. 472.Google Scholar

17 Ibid.Google Scholar

18 Ibid., p. 476.Google Scholar

19 Ibid.Google Scholar

20 Legislation to implement this commitment provided for the release on licence of members of paramilitary organizations on ceasefire who had served two years of their sentence.Google Scholar

21 ‘A Briefing on the Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act 1998’, prepared by the Committee on the Administration of Justice, September 1998, accessed at http://www.caj.org.uk/keydocs/TerrorismAct.htm.Google Scholar

22 An example is Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988, which made it an offence for local councils to promote homosexuality in schools. It was repealed in 2003. During the existence of the provision, there was just one unsuccessful (private) prosecution under the Act.Google Scholar

23 See, for example, Michael Peel, ‘Muslim Officer Warns on Terrorism Curbs’, Financial Times, 8 August 2006.Google Scholar

24 From p. 13 of text of Joint Declaration by the British and Irish Governments: April 2003, accessed at http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/peace/docs/bijoint010503.pdf. The text was released in May 2003.Google Scholar

25 The text of the St Andrews Agreement, including its five annexes, can be found at http://www.nio.gov.uk/st_andrews_agreement.pdf.Google Scholar

26 Garret FitzGerald, ‘Revised CRJ Protocol is Still Unacceptable’, The Irish Times, 29 July 2006.Google Scholar

27 Transcript of the prime minister's press conference on 26 July 2005, accessed at http://www.number-10.gov.uk.Google Scholar

28 See, for example, Geoffrey Wheatcroft, ‘Blair's Dubious Logic on Islamism and Ireland’, Financial Times, 26 August 2005, and Robert McCartney, ‘Blair's Shame’, Belfast Telegraph, 3 August 2005.Google Scholar