Member's statement: Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023
Member's statement by Mr Jim Allister KC on .
- MLA
- Mr Jim Allister KC
- Party at the time
- Traditional Unionist Voice
- Date
- 5 March 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4252359
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Last week, in our High Court, we had a very significant judgement. I refer to the striking down of a key part of the legacy Act. Where the constitutional significance of that arises is in the reasons why the High Court took that decision. It took it because of the court's acknowledgement of the supremacy of the protocol in our law. This was not the striking down of some statutory instrument or even some Act of this House; it was the striking down of an Act of Parliament.
The fact that it was struck down because of the primacy of the protocol is of immense constitutional significance and brings home to those of us who care the subservience of the United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland to EU law. It also, of course, dramatically debunked the fake news of Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, who told us when he did his dud deal that Northern Ireland's place in the United Kingdom had been wholly restored and that he accepted what was in the Command Paper when it affirmed that the Windsor framework applied only to trade. The High Court has clearly demonstrated that, far from applying only to trade, it applies to all these constitutional issues. Why? Because, under article 2 of the protocol or Windsor framework, Northern Ireland, alone in the United Kingdom, is retained under the control of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. In consequence of that, rights that were offended within that by the Legacy Act are incompatible with it. Therefore, those portions of the Act were struck down. That is a colossal constitutional assault on the integrity and independence of the United Kingdom and, of course, more particularly — we will see it again in the Rwanda Bill — evidence of the special and diminished place that Northern Ireland has been put in in the United Kingdom by virtue of the fact that it is the supremacy of EU law, not British law, that rules in these matters.
332 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.40 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.79).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- The overall probability was low and the text did not adopt any identity-based framing.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.35 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.06 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.20 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.22 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.41 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.40 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.79 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.20 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.91 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.06 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.03 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:43 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.