Stormont’s ongoing failure to adopt an anti-poverty strategy for Northern Ireland is “appalling”, the High Court heard on Friday.
Counsel for a human rights watchdog claimed the power-sharing administration has not remedied a legal breach identified 10 years ago.
The Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ) is seeking to judicially review the Department for Communities for allegedly failing to put in place a programme to alleviate poverty.
Backed by the Unison trade union and Barnardo’s charity, the challenge is also directed against the Executive Office along with the First and Deputy First Ministers as leaders of the cabinet.
Proceedings were issued over the state of progress since the court declared back in 2015 that Stormont has violated it duties under section 28E of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.
Karen Quinlivan KC, for CAJ, described the case as an attack on the lack of a strategy since then.
“It is now a decade since the High Court previously held that the Executive Committee was in breach of its duty to adopt an anti-proverty strategy,” she submitted.
“It is frankly appalling that that breach has never been rectified.”
The obligation featured in a section inserted into the Northern Ireland Act following the 2006 St Andrews Agreement which led to the restoration of the Stormont Assembly at that time.
Since then, specific commitments to progress the strategy were made in New Decade New Approach deal in 2020, according to CAJ.
Despite the Executive collapsing again in 2022, anti-povery plans were said to have been prepared for future incoming ministers to assess.
But it was claimed that a year after Stormont was restored again in February 2024, no blueprint has been adopted or considered.
“It is manifestly apparent that the Executive Committee continues to be in breach of its obligation… and the applicant is entitled to a declaration to that effect,” Ms Quinlivan insisted.
“The time for adoption of a strategy has passed.”
She alleged that Communities Minister Gordon Lyons has failed in his responsibility to develop a scheme, with implementation “thwarted” by continued delays.
The court was also told there had been “lethargic movement” since the judgment back in 2015.
Counsel added: “It is submitted that the minister has not acted with anything approaching the degree of promptiude required.”
With the challenge also directed against First Minister Michelle O’Neill and Deputy First Minister Emma Little-Pengelly, Mr Justice Humphreys acknowledged the wider interest in the interest in the strategy being adopted.
“If ever there is a subject that is cross-cutting, it is poverty,” the judge observed.
Tony McGleenan KC, for the departments under challenge, countered that the current legal duty only commenced when the current Executive was formed last year.
“The proper starting point is February 2024,” the barrister argued.
“We have a new mandate… there is an entirely new cast of characters and political parties.”
He maintained progress is now being made to ensure any legal obligations are met.
Reserving judgment, Mr Justice Humphreys recognised the public interest in the outcome.
“It is an important case concerning the respective roles of Ministers, the Executive Office and indeed the courts in the exercise of statutory duties and bringing forward strategies and policies of this nature,” he said.
Speaking outside court, CAJ Director Daniel Holder insisted the group had no choice but to bring the fresh challenge.
“The anti-poverty strategy is a key unfulfilled legal obligation from peace process agreements,” Mr Holder said.
“We are almost a year into Ministers’ being put back in place and no anti-poverty strategy has been adopted.
“Moreover the draft Programme for Government does not even name the anti-poverty strategy despite it being an outstanding legal obligation.”