and protected. We are therefore convinced that a lasting resolution of the conflict will require mechanisms to ensure that the rights of all are adequately protected.

We are concerned, however, that human rights were not integrated into the management of the peace process by the previous U.K. Government. This omission and the fact that further abuses occurred have contributed to the current impasse and the deterioration in the situation.

There is an inclination to make human rights a second stage. We believe it should be a primary agenda item and progress on human rights can help in reaching a settlement of the political and constitutional issue involved.

At key stages of the Northern Irish peace process U.S. involvement has played a vital role. President Clinton's close personal interest and the impressive work done by Senator Mitchell have been particularly important. A more targeted U.S. focus on making human rights a prime element in the peace process would be particularly opportune.

The new Labour Government has given strong public expression to its commitment to human rights in its international relations, and with regard to Northern Ireland. These early signals provide important and encouraging signs of hope.

It is important, however, that the international community does whatever it can to build upon these first tentative signs of hope. Moving from conflict to lasting peace is both slow and painful. Certainly this has been so in Northern Ireland. There are no quick fixes or easy solutions, and there will be many setbacks. International concern to keep the process on track is vital.

Human rights abuses are at the heart of the conflict. Addressing them cannot await long-term political solutions, but must be part and parcel of any attempt to build a lasting peace.

Accordingly, together with our sister organizations in Britain and Ireland, we have developed a human rights agenda for action, an agenda that should be addressed at the outset when discussions take place.

First, we call for effective mechanisms for the protection and promotion of human rights. Many human rights abuses in Northern Ireland occur because there is no written constitution, no codification of rights in the United Kingdom. The new Labour Government, however, says that it intends to incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights, and this is extremely welcome, but it is insufficient.

Northern Ireland needs its own bill of rights. Everyone in Northern Ireland, whether Nationalist or Unionist, shares an interest in, for instance, an accountable police service, freedom of expression, freedom from discrimination, freedom of religion, and other such fundamental liberties. All too often these shared interests are not effectively harnessed or prioritized. Indeed, we believe that a broad-based discussion of how best to protect everyone's rights would go a long way to facilitating discussion of other more controversial areas of political disagreement.

Second, CAJ calls for an end to emergency laws, and for a thorough review of the criminal justice system. The Lawyers Committee for Human Rights will speak to this issue in some detail. Suf

fice it to say that emergency legislation violates human rights, is unnecessary given the existence of other criminal justice legislation, and is counterproductive. The legislation has also led to many miscarriages of justice, affecting both Protestants and Catholics. You will hear more about these later.

The third key area requiring change is in the institutions which should protect human rights, but which all too often in Northern Ireland contribute to serious abuses. Human Rights Watch will speak in particular about the problems of policing which were encountered last summer and indeed more generally. These cannot, however, be seen in isolation. Particularly worrying are the continuing reports from detainees that police officers threaten and abuse lawyers via their clients.

The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture has commented that persons arrested in Northern Ireland under the Prevention of Terrorism Act run a significant risk of psychological forms of ill treatment, and that on occasions resort may be had by detective officers to forms of physical ill treatment.

To address this problem CAJ calls upon the government to introduce audio and video recording of interviews with detainees. This would be in the interest of detainees and would protect the police from false accusations.

We also call for steps to end police harassment which is regularly experienced by working class Protestant and Catholic youth.

The fourth issue that CAJ raises in its human rights agenda is the need to deal with the legacy of the past. The consequences of the failure to address past abuses are graphically highlighted by the ongoing controversy around Bloody Sunday. This year marks the 25th anniversary of the killing by the British army of 13 unarmed civil rights demonstrators in Northern Ireland.

Recent evidence has emerged confirming that the original inquiry was fundamentally flawed. A new and independent inquiry with international input is vital to establish the truth and remedy the injustice done to the deceased and their families. Moreover, addressing longstanding abuses of human rights can contribute itself to building a lasting peace in Northern Ireland.

Nor can the past be laid aside without addressing the issue of prisoners. It is ironic that the situation of Irish Republican prisoners held in Britain has actually deteriorated dramatically during the period of the cease-fire. Amnesty International will speak to the issue of prisoners in its presentation. The CAJ would urge that prompt steps be taken to secure the well being of prisoners.

Concrete action to improve the situation with respect to the areas I have described will contribute to the development of a strong culture of rights. The events of last summer where there was enormous communal tension emphasized the importance of developing a clear understanding that everyone is equal before the law, that human rights are inalienable, and that one must exercise one's rights with due respect for the rights of others.

There is a particular responsibility, however, on government to ensure that the rule of law applies. This will be vital in the coming marching season. Discriminatory behavior in all its forms must all be effectively outlawed, and I know this is an issue which has been of interest to people here in Congress. It has to be understood that

as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says, "Recognition of the inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace.

"

This brings us full circle to the argument which we made at the outset; namely, that having been at the heart of the conflict in Northern Ireland human rights must be at the heart of any peace process. Early signals from the new Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mo Mowlam, have been particularly positive. She however must not be deflected from prioritizing human rights concerns. It is also important that the new government in the Republic of Ireland show a clear understanding of the centrality of rights to building a lasting peace. It is particularly important at times when the political process encounters difficulties as it is bound to do, that the rights agenda provide tangible evidence of the benefits accruing from peaceful engagement with the democratic process.

With the resumption of paramilitary violence and the coming to office of new governments in both the United Kingdom and Ireland, Committee members and the U.S. administration may well hesitate to become involved at this moment on human rights issues. However, as human rights activists in Northern Ireland, we would argue that it is precisely because the peace process is so precarious that primary attention to the human rights agenda is necessary. The peace process is only likely to succeed when everyone feels that their rights are protected and respected.

Equally, it is precisely because there is a new government and a new opportunity to leave behind the appalling human rights track record of its predecessor that emphasis on human rights from a friendly ally, such as the United States, is so necessary.

Thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Mr. O'Brien appears in the appendix.]

Mr. SMITH. Mr. O'Brien, thank you very much for your very eloquent testimony. We have been joined on the panel by Mr. Matt Salmon, who is vice-chairman of the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, our subcommittee, and also by Mr. Kennedy, distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts. If they would like to just say a word or two.

Mr. Salmon. Mr. Kennedy.

Mr. KENNEDY. Just very briefly. I want to thank both you, Mr. Smith, as well as Chairman Gilman, for the leadership that you are showing on this issue. There can be no more important, I think, issue pertaining to human rights than making certain that the light of justice is shown upon people of human rights, and the courage that you are showing by continuing to keep this Congress involved in these issues is, I think, a tribute to you.

But I also want to thank all of the witnesses that are coming before us today, and let you know that we very much appreciate the difficulties and troubles that many of you and your families have been through and the continuing courage that I think all of you show in making certain that these issues are dealt with in the way they ought to be.

I believe very strongly that even the current forward steps that have been taken with regard to the peace process in human rights

come largely because of the involvement of President Clinton, which I think has occurred because of the leadership that people like Ben Gilman and Peter and others, Don and Bob and so many others in the Congress showed over a period of years prior to President Clinton's active involvement on these issues.

So I think that the Congress really has been in some ways a catalyst for getting the peace talks under way. Obviously, there have been setbacks recently. But I think continuing to show some of the injustices in Northern Ireland is a critical component to making certain that ultimately we find a peaceful solution to the troubles and difficulties in the north of Ireland.

So, again, I want to thank you very much, Chairman Smith, for your involvement and for hosting this hearing this morning.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Kennedy, and I hope you will stay. Mr. Kennedy is not a member of the Subcommittee or even the full International Relations Committee, but out of his interest in the issue has come by. So we appreciate you doing so. Mr. Posner.

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL POSNER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, LAWYERS COMMITTEE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

Mr. POSNER. Thank you very much.

First, Chairman Smith, I want to thank you for your leadership in convening these hearings and for your longstanding commitment to human rights issues in general. You have been a real friend of our community and we deeply appreciate everything you have done.

I also want to say a special thanks to Chairman Gilman. As the chairman of the Full Committee, you have also been somebody we have been able to turn to over the years, and I know your commitment on these issues is deep, and it is really heartfelt, and we greatly appreciate it.

This is an important time for this hearing. It is easy on one level to be quite distressed and despondent over the recent upsurge in violence which a number of you have mentioned. We would certainly associate ourselves with your unequivocal opposition to the use of violence for political means. It does represent a setback. And yet despite that there is a unique window of opportunity here for the human rights issues to be advanced forward as a part of the peace process, and as a catalyst to help reignite a more constructive process.

As several of you have said, there has been a tremendous commitment by Senator Mitchell in particular, who has played a very useful role as a mediator, and the Clinton administration more generally. The new U.K. Government, Prime Minister Blair's government, has also in its early days expressed a commitment to human rights generally and with respect to Northern Ireland in particular, and that is a welcome sign.

This is a moment where we need to change the paradigm for looking at the peace process. What I want to emphasize this morning is that rather than saying that the larger political conflict has to be resolved before human rights can be respected, it is the other way around. Denial of basic human rights are at the heart of the conflict, and it is essential for the peace process to go forward suc

cessfully that these issues be addressed. Incrementally, if you will, but these issues must be addressed in a serious way as a part of a strategy to getting all sides to the table in a meaningful discussion about the issues that really matter.

And so I welcome this hearing as an opportunity to help advance that agenda. I would hope that this subcommittee will continue to press on these issues, and in particular, I hope that you will press Assistant Secretary Shattuck or some other member of the State Department to come and testify at a later date and present the Administration's views. I think you have an important role to play in that regard.

We are concerned that in the context of the peace process there has not been great enough attention paid to what we regard as fundamental issues relating to the rule of law and justice. I want to highlight briefly three things which are outlined in my written statement, which I would ask be made part of the record of these hearings.

We are deeply concerned and share Martin O'Brien's concern that the whole emergency law framework in Northern Ireland has been the foundation for a longstanding pattern of human rights violations. We have called in a report we released last year for an end to the emergency laws. This is a moment where there needs to be a serious discussion about powers of detention where a number of abuses occur. The whole criminal justice process also needs to be examined because it often undercuts a number of the basic due process rights which are found throughout the British system, as Congressman King described in some detail.

We are also very concerned, and in the written testimony present added details about what we see as erosion of the judicial independence of the judiciary within Northern Ireland. In many cases confessions are obtained as a result of abusive police tactics. The absence of jury trials and lack of transparency in the appointment of judges are also part of a process which leads to an erosion in the rule of law. We believe these problems need to be corrected and addressed.

And the third area where we have devoted particular attention relates to the intimidation of defense lawyers. They play a critical role in any legal system in protecting the innocent. And in the case of Northern Ireland there has been a pattern, now longstanding, where clients or detainees are told that their solicitors-their lawyers are sympathetic to one side or the other of the conflict, that they are not really lawyers, and that people are going to come after these lawyers. I am very pleased to see that Patrick Finucane's son, Michael, is here today and he will speak about that particularly awful and tragic case later on. It is striking to me that there has still been no independent inquiry into the murder of Patrick Finucane, now 8 years after he was killed at his home.

These are ongoing problems. Lawyers continue to receive threats. I was in Northern Ireland less than 2 months ago. We continue to receive reports that the people running the detention facilities regard the lawyers as their opponents and their enemies. They try to do what they can to intimidate them, and as a result they undermine the judicial process. This pattern of attacks has to be stopped.