HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE TAKES UP REPORT ON UNITED KINGDOM"S DEPENDENCIES OF JERSEY, GUERNSEY AND ISLE OF MAN

Press Release
HR/CT/550

HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE TAKES UP REPORT ON UNITED KINGDOM’S DEPENDENCIES OF JERSEY, GUERNSEY AND ISLE OF MAN

While there was no rule preventing reference to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other international instruments in domestic proceedings, their provisions could not be directly enforced in the dependent territories of Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man, because the instrument was not part of domestic legislation, the Human Rights Committee was told this morning.

Mark de Pulford, Head of the Human Rights Unit, Home Office, United Kingdom, speaking as the Committee began its consideration of the fourth and fifth reports of the United Kingdom, said the three islands regarded incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights as their first priority. Incorporation of the Covenant in time had not been ruled out, but the island authorities wished to ensure, as did the United Kingdom, that they did not take on more than could be successfully managed at one time, thereby jeopardizing incorporation of the Convention.

Nevertheless, experts overwhelmingly stated how important it was that the three territories move towards the incorporation of the Covenant into domestic law. Was there any risk in prioritizing one treaty over another? an expert asked. Would it not cause the judicial authorities to focus too much on the application of that treaty? Non-discrimination was one of the areas in which the Covenant went further in protecting rights than the European Convention, an expert pointed out.

William Bailhache, Her Brittanic Majesty’s Attorney-General, Jersey, responding to an issue on the prevention of terrorism, said the successive terrorism laws of Jersey, as elsewhere in the British Isles, raised important and difficult questions about the rights of individuals. On occasions, he continued, a longer period of detention without charge might be necessary and would be in derogation of the Covenant. The United Kingdom was at present considering a new terrorism law, under which extensions of detention without charge would be left to a judicial authority to decide. If enacted, that law would allow that country to lift its derogation.

__________

* 1817th Meeting was a closed meeting.

Human Rights Committee - 2 - Press Release HR/CT/550 1818th Meeting (AM) 17 March 2000

Geoff Rowlan, Her Britannic Majesty’s Attorney General, Guernsey, in response to a question on discrimination against women in legislation and practice, said that, in 1996, the island’s Parliament considered a report covering sex discrimination in the employment field. That report was accepted and the Sex Discrimination (Guernsey) Law was drafted prohibiting discrimination in employment matters by reason of gender or marital status.

He said there was no discrimination against women with regard to property, inheritance or the right to hold public office. The Sex Discrimination (Guernsey) Law, which should be in force this year, would give a right to damages to persons who suffered discrimination at work, as well.

John Corlett, QC, Her Britannic Majesty’s Attorney-General, Isle of Man, responding to questions raised on race discrimination, stated that some legislation already proscribed dismissal on the basis of race, but such discrimination in general would be the subject of a forthcoming Racial Discrimination Bill. There was an outdated provision in the Aliens Restriction Act of 1948, which prohibited non-British subjects from being members of the Manx Civil Service. That would be repealed by the Civil Jurisdiction Bill in the near future.

Highlighting that a reservation had been made to article 11 on the prohibition of detention for non-performance of a contractual obligation, an expert asked, by what procedure was such imprisonment imposed? Also, what was the frequency of the application of imprisonment in cases of debt and what was the background of the reservation? Also, was there a historical tradition of imprisonment for debt?

The United Kingdom’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, introducing his delegation, noted that it was the first time the Crown Dependencies had appeared before the Committee. He hoped their answers would show that the Dependencies, together with the United Kingdom, were fully committed to creating a culture of human rights throughout the United Kingdom and its islands.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. to hear responses by the delegation to questions posed this morning.

Committee Work Programme

The Human Rights Committee met this morning to begin its consideration of the fourth additional periodic report of the United Kingdom (document CCPR/C/95/Add.10). The document contains additional information on compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by the Crown Dependencies of Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man.

States of Jersey

In its compliance with article 3 (gender equality), the report indicates that the States of Jersey have endorsed the principle that all forms of discrimination on the ground of sex should be removed. A special committee set up in 1991 produced: a Ten-Point Plan for Equal Opportunities for Men and Women in Employment: a Code of Good Practice on Maternity Entitlement in Employment; and booklets on sexual harassment in the workplace. Those guidelines were widely disseminated to employers and employees on the island.

According to the report, in its efforts to address article 10 (the rights of detainees), the States have adopted the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law (1994), which provides new methods for dealing with offenders under the age of 21. The law abolished sentences of Borstal training and the imprisonment of persons under the age of 21. It replaced those punishments with sentences of youth detention to be served in institutions for young offenders.

In compliance with article 17 (security of privacy and the home), the report says that the Sexual Offences (Jersey) Law was adopted in 1990. Its purpose was to provide that homosexual acts in private between consenting male adults would no longer be a crime punishable by Jersey law. Subject to the approval of her Majesty in Council, the States have also adopted the Sexual Offences (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 1994, the purpose of which is to lower the age at which males may consent to homosexual acts in private, from 21 to 18.

According to the report, in its efforts to address article 23 (protection of the family), the States of Jersey will be asked to approve the drafting of a new Matrimonial Causes Law, which will more effectively ensure equality of rights for spouses during a divorce and enhance the protection afforded to the children involved.

In complying with article 24 (protection of the rights of the child), the report says that the States of Jersey adopted the Protection of Children (Jersey) Law in 1994. This legislation prohibits the taking of indecent photographs of children and penalizes the possession, distribution, showing and advertisement of such.

The report also outlines compliance with articles 2, 4 and 25.

States of Guernsey

The report states that the general framework of the civil and political rights recognized by the Covenant are protected within the Bailiwick of Guernsey.

Addressing compliance with article 1 (the right of self-determination), the report says that there are no factors or difficulties preventing the free disposal of a person's natural wealth and resources during their lifetime. Certain restrictions apply to dispositions after death to protect the rights of the surviving spouse and children. No distinction of any kind is made, except that, on the island of Sark, realty devolves to the eldest sons.

In compliance with article 2 (equality before the law and courts), Guernsey has resolved that the reform (Guernsey) Laws 1948-1993 be amended to allow aliens to vote in all island elections, says the report.

The report states that in complying with article 3, the States of Guernsey are committed to adopting appropriate measures to ensure the equality of men and women in all spheres. In December 1993, they resolved to: condemn discrimination against women in all its forms; and to instruct States committees to take all the reasonable steps to identify and eradicate any discrimination against women in legislation or practice and to present proposals in that regard as and when practicable.

According to the report, in complying with article 7 (prohibition of torture and inhuman and cruel treatment), the Administration of Justice (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Law of 1991 makes any such practice a specific offence. In addressing article 9 (right to liberty and security), the report states that the Government's mental health services provide for treatment of a wide range of psychiatric and behavioral problems, with an open-door policy prevailing. While the vast majority of people receive treatment on an informal basis, a small number of patients considered to be a danger to themselves or others can be compulsorily detained under the Mental Treatment Law (Guernsey) 1993.

In addressing article 22 on the freedom of association, the report notes that while there are no political parties in the Bailiwick, there are also no restrictions to prevent their establishment, if it were so desired.

The report also details compliance with articles 6, 12, 14, 17, 18, 23, 24, and 25.

Isle of Man

In its compliance with articles 2 and 3, the report states that the Isle of Man provides both a civil remedy and a criminal sanction in respect of the violation of fundamental freedoms. Legal proceedings can be taken in the Isle of Man against the Government and public authorities in the same manner as against private individuals. There are no restrictions on a person’s right to recourse to the courts, and legal aid is available both in civil and criminal cases for those who cannot afford legal assistance.

Regarding article 4, the report says that it has not so far been necessary for the island to derogate from its responsibility under the Covenant. Emergency powers in the Isle of Man are by declaration of a state of emergency by the Governor in Council, acting under the provisions of either the Emergency Powers Act (1936-1989), Schedule 2 to the Home Affairs Board Act (1981), or by the Prevention of Terrorism Act (1990).

In compliance with article 6 (right to life), the report states that right is protected by both civil and criminal law on the island. If death is caused by negligence or by wilful intent, in civil cases a right to damages arises. Also, the Death Penalty Abolition Act (1993) abolished the death sentence and substituted it with life imprisonment. A pardon or commutation of sentence, however, may be granted in all cases in exercise of the Royal Prerogative of Mercy by the Lieutenant Governor as representative of the Sovereign on the Isle of Man.

The report says that there is no slavery or servitude, nor any forced or compulsory labour on the island as described in article 8. The right of action for false imprisonment is available on the island, as is the writ of habeas corpus. (The latter requires a person to be brought before a judge or into a court to investigate the lawfulness of his or her detention.) Imprisonment with hard labour cannot be imposed. Community Service Orders requiring a person to perform unpaid work for not less than 40 of more than 240 hours can be imposed under the Criminal Law Act (1981).

In its compliance with article 9 (right to liberty and security), according to the report, both writs of habeas corpus and actions for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution are maintainable on the island. In addressing article 10 (right of detainees to be treated with humanity and dignity), the report states that the functions of the Home Affairs Board in the Isle of Man have been transferred to the Department of Home Affairs. New prison rules were made in 1984 under the 1965 Prison Act and amended in 1989. An adolescent resource centre called “Cummal Shee” is now run by the Department of Health and Social Security. The Criminal Justice Act (1993) also requires the Department of Home Affairs to, so far as practicable, keep male prisoners under the age of 21 years separate from those aged 21 or over.

This act, continues the report, also stipulates that a child or young person shall not receive a custodial sentence or be remanded in custody unless circumstances are so exceptional that it would not be possible to deal with them in any other way. A secure juvenile unit is provided for any minor who needs to be remanded or detained in custody. The power to impose a sentence of Borstal training was revoked in the Isle of Man by the Prison and Youth Custody Act (1986) and replaced by a power to impose a sentence of youth custody. This sentence is served on the island.

In compliance with article 11 (prohibition of detention for non- performance of a contractual obligation), the report states that a person may be imprisoned for default in payment of a debt only where the debt arose under a High Court judgement and where it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the person making the default has the means to pay, but refuses to pay.

With respect to article 18 (freedom of religion or belief), the report says that the liberty of religious worship is unrestricted on the island, except in instances where public order has to be secured. Religious instruction is a compulsory school subject, but parents have legal rights relating to their children being excused from religious education and having access to denominational teaching of their preference. The teaching programme is in accordance with the agreed syllabus recommended by the Religious Education Advisory Committee and approved by the Department of Education.

Regarding article 19, (freedom of thought, opinion and expression), the report states that there are no restrictions except in cases of statements which are in contempt of court, blasphemous, seditious, defamatory, in breach of confidence or likely to provoke a breach of the peace.

In compliance with article 23 (protection of the family), according to the report, the Matrimonial Proceedings Act (1986) has abolished the common law actions for enticement and harbouring and the right to claim damages for adultery. With respect to article 25 (participation in public affairs), the report states that the right of women to vote in elections in the House of Keys was granted as far back as 1881. Subject to certain statutory exceptions, all persons are eligible for election and membership of the House of Keys, as well. Elections to local authorities are also conducted along the same principles. The report states that there are no restrictions on the enjoyment by any group of persons of the right to culture, religion and language, which is the subject of article 27, other than those referred to in article 22, which can be applied in the interests of national security, public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals and the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. In addition, members of any group of persons are entitled to the same protection of the law as others.

The report also outlines compliance with articles 5, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 24 and 26.

Introduction of Country Report

Sir JEREMY GREENSTOCK, the United Kingdom’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, noted that it was the first time the Crown Dependencies had appeared before the Committee. He hoped that the answers to the Committee’s questions would show that the Dependencies, together with the United Kingdom, were fully committed to creating a culture of human rights throughout the United Kingdom and its Islands.

Introducing the fourth and fifth reports, MARK DE PULFORD, Head of the Human Rights Unit in the Home Office, said that the Channel Islands were part of Normandy, which was now part of France. When in 1204 the King of England lost Normandy to France, the Channel Islands remained with the United Kingdom. The Islands retained their allegiance to the Crown, rather than to England or to the United Kingdom, as such, of which they had never formed part. It was a most interesting and unusual relationship, which has stood the test of time. The Isle of Man came to the Crown in the fourteenth century.

In the last 50 years, more and more control had been transferred to local institutions, he continued. The present constitutional position was that none of those islands could be properly described as a colony, overseas territory, autonomous region or devolved administration. Each was internally self- governed, with its own legislature, local administration, fiscal system, laws and courts. They made voluntary contributions to the United Kingdom for defence and overseas representation. Apart from that, the economies were wholly independent. Each administration was parallel with that of the United Kingdom, rather than subordinate to it.

He went on to say that the role of the Crown, in the context of today’s proceedings, was that the United Kingdom’s Government was directly answerable for the Island’s external relations, including those arising under international treaties, such as the Covenant. The United Kingdom had a formal responsibility to answer for any failure on the part of Islands to comply with obligations to treaties.

Replying to previously posed written questions, he said that there was no rule preventing reference to the Covenant and other international instruments in domestic proceedings. Provision of treaties could not be directly enforced, because the Covenant is not part of domestic legislation. The courts could make use of international treaties to which the United Kingdom was a party for the purposes of resolving ambiguities in legislation, considering the principles on which the court should exercise discretion and when the common law was uncertain.

Regarding the incorporation of the Covenant into domestic law, he said that given the developments in the United Kingdom, the Islands regarded incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights as their first priority. That was expected to make substantial demands on the resources of the courts and legal profession, as well as on government and all public authorities. Incorporation of the Covenant in due time had not been ruled out, but the Island authorities wished to ensure, as did the United Kingdom, that it did not take on more than could be reasonably managed at one time, thereby jeopardizing successful incorporation of the Convention.

Continuing, he said that to the extent that a breach of the Covenant was also a breach of statutory or common law, remedies might take the form of damages, injunctions and quashing of unlawful decisions. Reported breaches of the criminal law would result in investigations and, where appropriate, prosecution. Anyone could seek to persuade a member of any of the island legislatures to raise his case with the appropriate authority, invoking a Covenant right. Also, in Jersey and Guernsey, anyone could appeal to a review board against an administrative decision, invoking a Covenant right, if appropriate. In addition, anyone could petition the Queen in Council.

Although there was not yet specific Covenant training in the Islands, it was currently part of a developing area of interest, he said. There were also some local initiatives, such as setting up groups or task forces in Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man to organize training in human rights.

He added that the fourth and fifth reports had been published and widely distributed in the Channel Islands and the Island’s fifth report was available on the Home Office Web site, which was linked to other government Web sites and was fully accessible to the public.

WILLIAM BAILHACHE, Her Britannic Majesty’s Attorney-General, Jersey, responding to a question on discrimination on the basis of gender or disability in public life, said that, rather than discrimination, the minimum wage and unfair dismissal were seen as more significant issues to be addressed in legislation. Nevertheless, the island had full employment and 58 per cent of females over the age of 16 were economically active. As of 1 January 2000, 1,170 females were employed, as against 793 males, in the island’s main civil service grades. Moreover, numbers over the years had shown a steady increase of women in senior positions in the private sector. Of the 178 members of the Law Society, 42 were females. There were also 95 female accountants out of a total of 532.

Providing information on progress to promulgate a new matrimonial clauses law, he said at the time of the fourth report in 1994, men and women were treated equally during divorce. The husband, however, had the right to bring a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, whereas the wife had no such right. In practice, such petitions were rarely brought. Amendments were passed in 1995 and 1996, one of which removed that right. Accordingly, the Matrimonial Causes (Jersey) Law (1949) now ensured that spouses of both sexes had the opportunities to claim the same type of relief or remedy during divorce. The draft Children’s law would also replace parts of the old Matrimonial Causes Law and cases of divorce would be based on the principle that the child’s welfare was of paramount consideration. The new law would also enable a child to bring certain proceedings in his or her name.

A question was raised by the Committee on the new provisions and practice under the Separation and Maintenance Orders (Jersey) Law (1953), particularly with regard to inequalities between genders. He said that, under that legislation, the wife had no legal custody of her children until a court order to that effect and also no obligation to maintain her husband. The same did not apply to the husband. A draft law that was currently out for consultation would put spouses on an equal footing and was expected to be put before the island’s legislature during the year 2000.

Answering a question on the difference in treatment between legitimate and illegitimate children, he said the proposed new Children’s Law would give the mother of an illegitimate child parental responsibility for that child by operation of statute law. The father would be able to acquire joint parental responsibility by agreement with the mother or by an order of the court. Also under legislation, proceedings for maintenance could now be instituted by the mother of an illegitimate child at any time during the child’s minority. Such a child currently lacked the right to inherit on intestacy from any relative other than his or her mother. There was, however, a preference to amend the law, so as to treat legitimate and illegitimate children equally in all respects, including their right to participate in the estate of a deceased parent by way of forced heirship.

On the issue of racial discrimination, he said a document entitled “Race Relations Working Party: Discussion Document”, was brought forward in December 1999. It outlined proposals for a wide-ranging law to deal with racial discrimination and had been widely circulated. The process had received much publicity on the island and had generated many interesting comments. There was very strong support throughout Jersey for the proposed legislation, and it was expected that work on drafting would begin shortly. It was also anticipated that it would be passed next year. In addition, a steering group was established in October 1999 to tackle racial discrimination and emphasize cultural integration in schools and the workplace.

Responding to the issue raised on the prevention of terrorism, he said the successive terrorism laws of Jersey, as elsewhere in the British Isles, raised important and difficult questions about the rights of individuals. The power of extended detention had not been used in the island. It had to be borne in mind, however, that the so-called Common Travel Area -- which comprised the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and Ireland -- permitted travelers to move about freely. It, therefore, continued to be essential that the authorities retained certain powers in the fight against terrorism.

He said in the case of terrorism related to the affairs of Northern Ireland, it would be necessary to consider what period of detention was needed. On occasions, a longer period of detention without charge might be necessary and would be in derogation of article 9 of the Covenant. The United Kingdom was at present considering a new terrorism law, under which extensions of detention without charge would be left to a judicial authority to decide. If enacted, that law would allow the United Kingdom to lift its derogation. In light of that, similar amendments to the Jersey law would be made.

Justifying the differences that existed between the age limits for heterosexual and homosexual activity, he said the age of consent for the former was 16 and the latter 18. The Jersey legislature had not pursued a proposal to lower the age for homosexual consent to 16, as it wished to see how the issue would be dealt with in the United Kingdom.

GEOFF ROWLAN, Her Britannic Majesty’s Attorney General, Guernsey, responding to a question on discrimination against women in legislation and practice, said that action was being taken on a broad front. In 1996, the island’s Parliament also considered a report covering sex discrimination in the employment field. That report was accepted and the Sex Discrimination (Guernsey) Law was drafted prohibiting discrimination in employment matters by reason of gender or marital status. There was also no discrimination against women with regard to property, inheritance or the right to hold public office.

Responding to the question on the hereditary system in Sark, where realty devolved to the eldest son, he said the Real Property (Succession) (Sark) Law (1999) came into force in January 2000. The law abolished all rules of law or custom under which, for the purposes of succession to real property, males were preferred to females. He said that the Sex Discrimination (Guernsey) Law, which should be in force this year, would give a right to damages to persons who suffered discrimination at work.

Turning to the Isle of Man, JOHN CORLETT, QC, Her Britannic Majesty’s Attorney-General, Isle of Man, said that custody discipline was exercised under rules made in 1984 under the Prison Act 1965, as amended. Draft new rules, to be made under the Custody Act 1995 and based on United Kingdom Prison Rules 1999, make provision for the discipline and control of detainees. The human rights of detainees charged with disciplinary offences were protected under the existing prison rules. Allegations of a serious nature were referred to the police for investigation and possible prosecution. Legal representation was allowed in such cases, and legal aid was available for that purpose.

As to whether juvenile offenders were segregated from adults, he said that under the Custody Act 1995, male detainees under 21 must be, as far as practicable, detained separately from those over 21. In practice, they shared accommodation only for church attendance, education and visits. Juveniles (those under 17 years of age) were always segregated from young (17-20) and adult (21 and over) detainees. The prison kept a register of juveniles in custody, and juveniles had a special regime of family visits, welfare support, counselling, education and recreation.

Regarding the right to compensation, he said that common law provided a remedy for those who suffered bodily restraint not expressly authorized by law. The High Court could order the release of a person who was falsely imprisoned or wrongly detained, and could also award damages. There was no statutory right to compensation for a wrongful conviction, but a person who could show that he had a reasonable expectation of receiving compensation could apply for judicial review of the decision.

Any complaints about non-compliance with the right to education and freedom of religion would be raised with the Department of Education and included in the annual report on complaints, he said. If proven, the complaints would be treated by the Department as a disciplinary matter against the head teacher. All schools were subject to independent inspection.

Concerning the right to form or join trade unions, he said that protection against discrimination on grounds of trade union membership or activities was provided by the Employment Act 1991 and the Employment (Amendment) Act 1996. The Trade Union Act 1991 (as amended) also recognized the right of workers to organize collectively and provide a legal framework, which included various immunities. The only restriction applied to members of the police service, who might, however, join the Police Federation, which represented policemen in all welfare and efficiency matters, excluding discipline, appointments and promotion.

Finally, he stated that some legislation already proscribed dismissal on the basis of race, but racial discrimination, in general, would be the subject of a forthcoming Racial Discrimination Bill. There was an outdated provision in the Aliens Restriction Act of 1948, which prohibited non-British subjects from being members of the Manx Civil Service. That would be repealed by the Civil Jurisdiction Bill in the near future.

Questions from Experts

An expert asked if the European Convention on Human Rights was identical to the Covenant. The mechanisms of guarantees and limitations were different, as were the extent and scope of rights. There were also different interpretations of articles. The Committee’s concerns were not answered by incorporation of that Convention alone.

An expert asked both Jersey and Isle of Man to specify the actions they had taken to combat race discrimination. Also, what was the present state of the prohibition of racial discrimination in those territories? Was racial discrimination in the public and private sector prohibited by law?

Another expert said it would be important for the State party to inform the Committee on issues that contravened the provisions of the Covenant. Addressing the equality of women, he asked what kind of positive measures were being taken to increase opportunities for their equal participation? To what extent did the legislation cover that issue and were there tools to combat discrimination by the private sector, including private schools? Clarification on the issue of corporal punishment in private schools was also requested.

Another expert asked whether an ombudsman’s office or a similar institution existed for the Dependencies. Also, was there a human rights commission or similar body to deal with human rights complaints in addition to the courts? Secondly, with respect to article 17 and the report on Jersey, he wanted to know whether any conclusion could be drawn from the United Kingdom’s experience with regard to age of consent and homosexual activities. He also requested the delegation to highlight the situation with regard to that issue and the other islands. Regarding article 19 and the Isle of Man, he wondered what would be considered blasphemous and what would happen to individuals who made such blasphemous statements. Also, he asked how far the Isle had come with the sex discrimination bill and how it was to be enforced. Was there any commission dealing with sex discrimination, in general, and with equal pay, in particular?

An expert was encouraged by the information provided by the delegation regarding the extent to which the courts gave regard to international instruments. At the same time, she was aware of the limits of such a situation, in which the courts were not able to directly apply the principles flowing from those instruments. It was important that the three territories were moving towards the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights. That, however, would not give full effect to all the rights protected under the Covenant, which provided for a wider range of rights than the Convention. Was any consideration being given to extending by legislation the remedies available to specific instances not covered by the European Convention?

She was concerned by a statement in the report which alluded to the fact that the authorities did not consider it necessary to make particular efforts to promote the protection of human rights, especially in Jersey. She wanted to know whether the attitude reflected there had been effectively replaced. Also of concern was the delegation’s response with regard to the status of illegitimate children. All discrimination with regard to children should be removed. Further, clarification was necessary regarding imprisonment in cases of debt.

Another expert asked how Jersey had redressed discrimination against women in its inheritance laws. Had that been addressed with the new draft laws? Turning to Guernsey, he requested detailed information on the criteria, as well as procedure for putting a person under compulsory detention in mental hospitals.

Concerning children’s detention rights, it was stated that juveniles might not be placed under secure conditions unless certain criteria applied, he noted. Could the delegation clarify what that criteria was and how it was applied in practice? Regarding segregation of juveniles from adults, did the delegation have anything more to add on the practical application of that principle?

While it was stated that there was no gender discrimination with regard to inheritance, he wondered whether there was any distinction made with regard to the order of children (eldest, middle, youngest).

Concerned about the status of the Covenant in United Kingdom legislation, another expert highlighted the importance of its incorporation into domestic law. She wondered why the same arguments regarding the incorporation of other international instruments, such as the European Convention on Human Rights, could not also apply to the Covenant. What were the differences underlying the treatment given to the Convention and to the Covenant?

Regarding gender discrimination in Jersey, she noted that a great deal of progress had not been reported. In the main report, the United Kingdom had not made it possible to effectively evaluate the measures taken to address gender discrimination. What was envisaged if the results were not on par with the expectations? Also, in comparing the state of progress regarding article 23 of the Covenant, it could be said that progress had been slow. He requested further information in that regard.

While expressing general satisfaction with the replies given, another expert stated that a number of concerns persisted. It was important for the delegation to acknowledge the unanimity of the Committee in terms of their dissatisfaction over the non-incorporation of the Covenant into the laws of the islands. The Covenant must be incorporated as soon as possible, he stated.

He had a number of concerns. First, on discrimination, he noted the studies conducted in Jersey on that subject. While those studies were encouraging, he noted that gaps existed in the available information and he requested clarification. Secondly, he did not understand how the law on terrorism was compatible with the measures indicated in the Covenant.

While it was stated that religious freedom was respected in the three islands, he wanted to know if there was an official religion and, if so, what distinction was made between the official religion and other religions, particularly in the area of education. Also, what was the situation regarding the introduction of retroactive criminal legislation in the Isle of Man? he asked.

Another expert noted that, technically, the United Kingdom’s model of incorporation was not the same as the traditional model of incorporating international instruments into national legislation. He wondered whether there were any unforeseen consequences of the incorporation of one treaty with that of the other. Also, was there any risk in prioritizing one treaty over another? Would it not cause the judicial authorities to focus too much with the application of that treaty? Non-discrimination was one of the areas in which the Covenant went further in protecting rights than did the European Convention. He also wondered whether the right to democracy was being fully implemented in the Dependencies.

Turning to Jersey, he wanted to know the progress of the process towards reforms in the electoral system. Were there any possible remaining restrictions regarding the right to vote and, if so, what was being done to remove them?

Referring to Guernsey and the Isle of Man, an expert queried the co- educational nature of schools and wondered how such a separation between boys and girls could be allowed, since schools should promote healthy interaction between them and the elimination of discrimination. With regard to the issue of religious education, clarification was requested on whether such education was limited to teachings and dogma or did it go beyond and include actual worship, specifically worship practices at school. He also wanted to know what religion was being discussed in such education and which one had priority.

On the issue of marriage, the same expert noted that such a union could be celebrated in various places of worship or in other locations. Was there any system of civil marriage? Addressing freedom of religion, the issue of discrimination vis-à-vis other religions that were not the majority religion was

raised. Also, he wanted to know whether teachers were provided with curricula from the States or whether such material was supplied by the church.

Another expert wanted clarification about the place of the Covenant in United Kingdom legislation. Elaboration on preventive detention and discrimination against illegitimate children was also requested. The process used to prepare the report being discussed today was questioned, as well. In addition, the expert wanted to know how an ongoing dialogue with the Channel Islands could be pursued.

An expert noted that a reservation had been made to article 11 on the prohibition of detention for non-performance of a contractual obligation. He wanted to know by what procedure was such imprisonment imposed. Also, what was the frequency of the application of imprisonment in cases of debt and what was the background of the reservation? Was there a historical tradition of imprisonment for debt?

An expert said a clear idea of how far along the process against race and gender discrimination was had not been provided. The delegation was, therefore, asked to make note of that observation and to communicate with the Committee any developments in respect of proposed laws.

The same expert said several references had been made to the fact that the United Kingdom was an active member of the European Convention on Human Rights, if not its principal customer. Since the Human Rights Committee was not the same as the European Court, had any thought been given to ratifying the First Optional Protocol? The United Kingdom’s active membership of the European Convention might suggest that it did not have to consider ratifying the Protocol. It was suggested that, perhaps, it should ratify the instrument and begin appearing before the Committee to respond to communications.

* *** *