Written Evidence by the Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ), to the Joint Committee on Human Rights legislative scrutiny of Northern Ireland Troubles Bill.
Published:
November 28, 2025
This written evidence was submitted by the Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ) to the UK Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) as part of its legislative scrutiny of the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, introduced in October 2025.
The submission welcomes the Government’s stated intention to repeal the 2023 Legacy Act and replace the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Retrieval (ICRIR) with a reformed Legacy Commission, but raises serious concerns about whether the new Bill complies with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and international human rights standards.
CAJ focuses on three key areas of concern raised by the JCHR:
- ECHR-compliant investigations and the McKerr group of cases: The submission argues that the Bill fails to expressly require Legacy Commission investigations to meet the procedural requirements of Articles 2 and 3 ECHR. CAJ highlights the removal of explicit ECHR compliance provisions that were present in earlier Stormont House Agreement draft legislation and warns that this undermines the UK’s obligations in relation to unresolved legacy cases.
- Disclosure and the ‘national security veto’: CAJ strongly criticises provisions allowing Secretaries of State to restrict or veto disclosure of information to victims’ families on national security grounds. The submission echoes UN expert concerns that these powers could be used to conceal state involvement in killings and serious human rights violations, are incompatible with ECHR standards, and replicate provisions already found unlawful by the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal.
- Independence of appointments to the Judicial Panel: The evidence raises concerns about the Secretary of State’s role in appointing members of the Legacy Commission’s judicial panel. CAJ argues that this risks undermining independence and conflicts with Good Friday Agreement reforms, recommending instead that appointments be made through the Northern Ireland Judicial Appointments Commission (NIJAC).
You can read the full submission here.