The Irish Council for Civil Liberties is discriminating against atheists

Michael Nugent

In October Atheist Ireland discovered that the ICCL is running an Anti-Discrimination Law Review Project, an excellent and important initiative, that is seriously flawed by unconscious bias on the issue of discrimination on the ground of religion.

The project has an Advisory Group whose expertise is described as “vital in ensuring that the proposed recommendations are appropriate and workable from the perspective of disadvantaged communities and their advocates.”

In all areas other than discrimination on the ground of religion, the composition of the Group reflects this goal - for example, there are representatives of Belong To, Inclusion ireland, Older and Bolder, Immigrant Council of Ireland, Amnesty Ireland, Irish Traveller Movement, ICTU, and Trans* Education and Advocacy, as well as several legal professionals.

Then, when it comes to the ground of religion, not only does the Advisory Group fail to include the perspective of atheists who are discriminated against, but it actually includes a representative of the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference - the leadership of the Church that most discriminates against us.

There is no example, under any of the other grounds, where the main private discriminating body in the country is represented on the Advisory Group. Also, none of the other bodies represented on the Group has had the UN Human Rights Committee raise concerns about them.

This is an example of the unconscious bias against atheists that is ingrained in Irish society, to the extent that it even manifests itself in an anti-discrimination project. Atheist rights advocacy in Ireland is still at the stage of consciousness raising that feminism was some decades ago.

We wrote to the ICCL about this last October, and several times since then, and have been repeatedly told that they will reply to our concerns when they have time to do so, but they have not actually replied to the substance of our concerns (other than to tell us that they do not envisage inviting us to join the Advisory group of the project).

Yesterday, seven weeks since we first raised this issue, and four weeks since we sent our last email asking when we could meet to discuss the issue, a request to which we have had no response in the past four weeks, we wrote again and this time published the letter online.

Today the ICCL publicly criticized Atheist Ireland as follows in a comment on a blog post which included our most recent letter to the ICCL:

"This post is seriously inaccurate in a number of significant respects and does nothing to further your cause. You have been told quite clearly that the ICCL rejects your criticisms and does not intend to invite Atheist Ireland to join this Advisory Group at this stage. You will receive a fuller response when our very busy schedule permits. In the meantime, frankly I expect better of Atheist Ireland. Happy holidays."

This is the fifth time in nearly two months that the ICCL has told us that it intends to reply to our concerns about this issue, but it has yet to actually do so. Please read the full letter, linked below, to understand the context of this issue, and please contact the ICCL to ask them to address the issue in an inclusive and human rights based way.

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties is discriminating against atheists, and is failing to address the issue

Michael Nugent

Here are the addresses to contact the ICCL directly and let them know your views on this issue

Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/IrishCouncilforCivilLiberties

Email
info@iccl.ie

Twitter
http://twitter.com/ICCLtweet

ShooterSF

Done. Doubt it'll stay up long,

"Rename to the ICCLUYABDABA? The Irish Council for Civil Liberties Unless You Are Being Discriminated Against for Being Atheist? You could even get Fred Phelps dressed as Fred Flinstone to market it?"

(Dammit I spelt Flintstone wrong )

expectationlost

seems like judy walsh is actually running this thing i think http://www.iccl.ie/articles/new-iccl-legal-textbook-launched.html http://www.ucd.ie/socialjustice/staff/fullname,128348,en.html



where did michael get the list of participants

Michael Nugent

expectationlost wrote: »

seems like judy walsh is actually running this thing i think http://www.iccl.ie/articles/new-iccl-legal-textbook-launched.html http://www.ucd.ie/socialjustice/staff/fullname,128348,en.html

The ICCL has commissioned the UCD research team (which is led by Judy Walsh) to produce the report.

The Advisory Group is selected by the ICCL (not by the UCD research team) and part of its role is "ensuring that the proposed recommendations are appropriate and workable from the perspective of disadvantaged communities and their advocates."

expectationlost wrote: »

where did michael get the list of participants

It was distributed as part of a briefing document about the project, at the conference and book launch in October that you have linked to above.

Zamboni

Whilst I agree with the sentiment in relation to the specific project Michael, they are not answerable to you or AI.
They are an independent organisation with a fairly standard constitution similar to AI.
AI has no "right" to be on the advisory group.
If you can't beat them, join them...

http://www.iccl.ie/iccl-constitution--2.html

Michael Nugent

Zamboni wrote: »

Whilst I agree with the sentiment in relation to the specific project Michael, they are not answerable to you or AI.
They are an independent organisation with a fairly standard constitution similar to AI.

I agree with this, and we said the following in our letter to them:

We have repeatedly stressed to the ICCL that we want to have a positive and mutually supportive working relationship. We appreciate and respect its work. And we do not want to influence how the ICCL conducts its work, on issues that do not overlap with our agenda. However, when the ICCL chooses to act in a quasi-coordinatory role, on a project that is central to our agenda, then its conduct becomes a legitimate issue for us to lobby on.

Zamboni wrote: »

AI has no "right" to be on the advisory group.

I also agree with this. The reason we asked to be invited to join the Advisory Group was that when we first raised the issue, they asked us to write to them outlining our concerns and asking to be invited to join the Advisory Group. Then when we did that, they eventually replied that they don't envisage inviting us "at this stage", whatever that means.

We also raised four other issues, which they have completely ignored:

1. Please treat discrimination on the ground of religion in the same rights-advocacy focused way as you are treating discrimination on other grounds.
2. Please invite Atheist Ireland to provide a member of the Advisory Group, to bring expertise from the perspective of those who are discriminated against.
3. Please reconsider the inclusion on the Advisory Group of a representative of the Church that most discriminates against us, and that the UNHRC has raised concerns about.
4. Please address the unconscious bias that has caused this Project to treat discrimination on the grounds of religion differently to other forms of discrimination.
5. Please let us all learn from this experience, so that we can move forward together as advocacy groups protecting and promoting human and civil rights.

Zamboni wrote: »

If you can't beat them, join them...
http://www.iccl.ie/iccl-constitution--2.html

I am considering doing that, but I probably have enough on my hands already without trying to reform the ICCL. As always, it is a question of how best to maximise the use of my time.

expectationlost

how is it that you can join the ICCL Zamboni? the others are not direct partners of the ICCL they are just more established lobbying groups, it seem like Atheist Ireland and very much trying to become that too.

Zamboni

expectationlost wrote: »

how is it that you can join the ICCL Zamboni? the others are not direct partners of the ICCL they are just more established lobbying groups, it seem like Atheist Ireland and very much trying to become that too.

The point is the people in the ICCL can do whatever the feck they like (as long as it's legal).
They are only answerable to their members and Irish Law.

AI could take twenty of it's own law educated members and create an Organisation called the Irish Council for Anti-Discrimination if they so wished and ensured that fighting discrimination against atheism was an aim.

Zamboni

Michael Nugent wrote: »

I am considering doing that, but I probably have enough on my hands already without trying to reform the ICCL. As always, it is a question of how best to maximise the use of my time.

I thought the exact same about your organisation when I realised I disagreed with a variety of issues.
I would suggest not getting into a public bickering with this crowd.
It looks silly and to be honest I'd never paid much heed to their existence until today!
You're doing a great awareness campaign for them!

expectationlost

i don't think asking for reply is asking too much particularily considering the ICCL keep saying they'll give them one (but delaying it)

Zamboni

expectationlost wrote: »

i don't think asking for reply is asking too much particularily considering the ICCL keep saying they'll give them one (but delaying it)

Aye out of courtesy but have you seen their executive board?
They are all barristers and solicitors. AI are lucky they got anything back at all :pac:

jank

There is no example, under any of the other grounds, where the main private discriminating body in the country is represented on the Advisory Group. Also, none of the other bodies represented on the Group has had the UN Human Rights Committee raise concerns about them.

This is an example of the unconscious bias against atheists that is ingrained in Irish society

:rolleyes:

Seriously??

Just because you are not invited to be part of their group and some bishop is doesnt mean they are discriminating agaisnt you. Are they discriminating against muslims? Jews? Members of the Jedi church?

As mentioned they are an independant private body answerable only to their members. Crying discrimination because one is not invited to a private party is exactly the reason why people are sick of this PC society.

If you are having a personal or private spat with them perhaps take it elsewhere?

Attabear

jank wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Seriously??

Just because you are not invited to be part of their group and some bishop is doesnt mean they are discriminating agaisnt you. Are they discriminating against muslims? Jews? Members of the Jedi church?

As mentioned they are an independant private body answerable only to their members. Crying discrimination because one is not invited to a private party is exactly the reason why people are sick of this PC society.

If you are having a personal or private spat with them perhaps take it elsewhere?

It depends if the above Muslims, Jews and Jedi looked to become members.

robindch

jank wrote: »

If you are having a personal or private spat with them perhaps take it elsewhere?

If somebody is alleging discrimination against atheists or agnostics, and is able to back this up with written evidence, then it's entirely appropriate that this is discussed in Ireland's largest discussion forum for atheists and agnostics.

expectationlost

that atheist can't find non-religous schools is the basis for claiming theres actually discrimination, i think probably other religious groups were asked in the same manner AI was

look at the list

Appendix 1: Members of the project’s Advisory Group

Michael Barron, Executive Director of Belong To
Deirdre Carroll, CEO of Inclusion Ireland
Patricia Conboy, Director of Older and Bolder
Siobhan Cummiskey, Barrister at Law
Hilkka Becker, Senior Solicitor with Immigrant Council of Ireland
Fiona Crowley, Research Manager of Amnesty Ireland
Susan Fay, Managing Solicitor with Irish Traveller Movement
David Joyce, Equality Officer of ICTU
Cliona Kimber, Barrister at Law
Moya de Paor, Managing Solicitor with NCLC
Cat McIlroy, Founder of Trans* Education and Advocacy
Eoin O’Mahony, Irish Catholic Bishops Conference
Conor Power, Barrister at Law (Chairperson)
Dil Wickremasinghe, Broadcaster and Social Entrepreneur




whats missing?, one of the people may be representing Jewish people, not familair enough with to say they aren't, you could well have muslim, but then you would need a secular group if you were going to deal with schools, a lot of those people seem to deal with employment discrimnation, not all of them are lawyers, but obviously the focus is on the written law.

you could have a lawyer who's dealth with cases for minority religions rather then expecting a direct representative for each, but i think trying to include atheist/secularism under their remit would clash.

Dades

One of the people on that list is my mate's sister. Small world.

Galvasean

robindch wrote: »

If somebody is alleging discrimination against atheists or agnostics, and is able to back this up with written evidence, then it's entirely appropriate that this is discussed in Ireland's largest discussion forum for atheists and agnostics.

Look at you, getting the digs in

Michael Nugent

expectationlost wrote: »

you could have a lawyer who's dealth with cases for minority religions rather then expecting a direct representative, but i think trying to include atheist/secularism under they're remit it would clash.

There is a good reason for including the perspective of explicitly nonreligious people, as distinct from minority religions. That reason is that the equality laws, which the project is researching, explicitly exempt all religious bodies, whether majority or minority, from having to comply with the equality laws in order to protect the religious ethos of their institutions. There is no comparable exemption for nonreligious bodies.

Michael Nugent

The ICCL sent us a letter yesterday evening.

The ICCL also posted today on its Facebook page a mistaken allegation about Atheist Ireland, specifically that:

“The erroneous notion that there is a “representative” from the Catholic Church emanates from Mr Nugent, and is amongst a number of material inaccuracies corrected in the ICCL’s 5-page letter to him. There is no “representative” of any religious body on the panel.”

We will reply in detail over the weekend to the letter that we received yesterday evening from the ICCL. We will seek to do so in a way that enables everyone involved to address these issues openly, transparently and fairly, so that we can continue to work together as civil advocacy groups.

But we want to immediately address the public allegation that “The erroneous notion that there is a ‘representative’ from the Catholic Church emanates from [Atheist Ireland]”, in case it gains credibility by not being corrected.

You can read the details here.

Zamboni

Jesus Christ, Michael does AI not have more pressing matters than arguing with an relatively obscure organisation?

Michael Nugent

Zamboni wrote: »

Jesus Christ, Michael does AI not have more pressing matters than arguing with an relatively obscure organisation?

We can multitask.

We've also been working this week on a briefing paper for TDs on the Marriage Registration Bill.

And we had our Christmas party yesterday!

Hotblack Desiato

I just don't get it. What is ICCL's motivation? Are they overtly or covertly pro-religion?

lazygal

I think Michael is doing some good work highlighting the membership. TBH, the ICCL is one of the bodies I thought was 'doing good stuff' and I never thought to look too closely at who works with it or alongside it. If there is indeed a member of a Catholic organisation on the latest project group, it behoves the ICCL to offer a proper explanation as to the selection criteria of those chosen. It would seem odd to have a Catholic representative but no representative of those of any other or no faith.

Hotblack Desiato

According to here David Norris is a supporter of the ICCL. Wonder what he'd think of this nonsense.

iguana

I emailed them two days ago to ask about this, explaining that I wasn't anything to do with AI but as a non-religious person was curious if the discrimination faced by people like us was something they planned on addressing. They emailed me back today to say they had sent Michael a letter outlining the inaccuracies in his blog post. Which in no way at all addressed my query. I'd previously admired the ICCL but this has left me very unimpressed.

ShooterSF

As part of the discussion myself and others have had on their facebook page it turns out they want the state to continue to support discrimination against non-catholics in schools but to provide a few more non-discriminatory ones for the minorities. Replace catholicism whit white skin there and you can see how modern their view is.

expectationlost

yeah so Michael makes the point that Eoin O’Mahony is listed as

Eoin O’Mahony, Irish Catholic Bishops Conference

so that's where you get the idea from, I know Eoin O'Mahony from twitter and blogging as a social geographer but he does work for the Bishops, and thats not by total chance.

ICCL points to this UN rights submission which does recognise the lack of choice but the recommendation is bit underwhelming but again this document was suppsoed to represent relgious charities aswell pg 100-102 http://rightsmonitor.org/Final_ICCPR_Shadow_Report_June_2008.pdf The State must increase its provision for the establishment of non-denominational education primary and post-primary levels.

recedite

Michael Nugent wrote: »

You have been told quite clearly that the ICCL ..... Happy holidays."

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties is discriminating against atheists, and is failing to address the issue

"Happy Holidays"!!! (That should keep the atheist happy)... what a plonker :pac:

I wonder why they have a RCC representative?
Is it because of the widespread discrimination suffered by RCC members in this country, or is it because they represent the conscience of the nation? Integrity, purity and innocence; (those attributes which the lawyers club might be perceived to lack)

Fortyniner

If we are unhappy with the status quo in relation to the evident representation of the RCC hierarchy then we should make our views known.

I do not accept that the RCC hierarchy are pillars of wisdom and good counsel. The ongoing assumption that they have a right to recognition as such needs to be challenged at every opportunity.

The ICCL seem to be showing unseemly disregard for the underprivileged.

keane2097

Seems like a bizzarro stance the ICCL have taken at all times on this issue. The letter excerpt is very adversarial.