The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) has published written legal submissions made to the Supreme Court in exercise of its amicus curiae (‘friend of the court’) function.

Under the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Act 2014, IHREC can apply for liberty to appear before the superior courts in this way in proceedings that involve, or are concerned with, the human rights or equality rights of any person.

The commission appeared before the court in the case of In the Matter of JJ, which concerned medical treatment, the rights of the child and the rights of minor wards of court.

Injuries

The case focused on the medical treatment of John (not his real name), an 11-year-old boy who suffered life-changing neurological injuries in an accident.

The hospital treating John had obtained permission from the High Court to follow a course of treatment with which John’s parents do not agree.

The High Court order allowed the hospital, if deemed appropriate by John’s medical team, to administer medication that could impact the boy’s respiratory function. The High Court further held that his medical team could if they deemed appropriate withhold certain treatments, including admission to an intensive care unit (ICU).

Constitutional rights

IHREC said it did not take a view on what treatment John should or should not receive. “Rather, the Commission argued that any decision in respect of John’s treatment had to be made in a manner that balanced and protected his constitutional rights as a child, with due regard to the rights of his parents,” it said.

A five-judge panel of the Supreme Court heard the case remotely over three days this week. There were six parties before the court, including separate barristers for each of the boy’s parents, and a Guardian Ad Litem, whose function is to represent the best interests of a child to the court.

The commission queried whether the decision to make John a ward of court was a proportionate interference with his rights in circumstances where, the commission argued, it removed decision-making capacity from his parents.

Importance 

The commission has previously made amicus curiae interventions in the area of wardship, including in C v Cork University Hospital and Ors.

Chief commissioner Sinéad Gibney (pictured) said the body made itself available to the court in this case due to the importance and the sensitivities of the issues.

“This case involved an extensive examination of the new constitutional provisions relating to the rights of the child introduced into law in 2015 following a referendum,” she said. “We are mindful that at the centre of this case is a family in very difficult personal circumstances.”