THE Sinn Fein president has asked how the two main unionist leaders can question the commitment of the fringe loyalist parties to the Mitchell principles when they themselves flouted those principles in July.
Mr Gerry Adams, in a statement yesterday, accused Ulster Unionist Party leader Mr David Trimble and the DUP leader the Rev Ian Paisley, of lacking courage and having no vision for the future because of their "refusal to embrace real dialogue".
"David Trimble and Ian Paisley are locked into a past built on sectarianism and a desire to dominate. They are failing their people. They are not providing responsible leadership", he said.
He called on those "in the churches, the loyal institutions, local community groups and in business who recognise the dangers posed by a narrow old fashioned unionist agenda to act as a credible alternative.
Mr Trimble and Dr Paisley had "consistently embraced domination and rejected negotiation - except when it suits them", claimed Mr Adams.
"In particular, David Trimble's call for mediation in the in fighting among loyalists stands in stark contrast to his outright rejection of mediation with his own constituents on the Garvaghy Road, or local Catholic communities elsewhere," he added.
"It is no coincidence that the negotiations between the Apprentice Boys, the Black Preceptory and local communities took place, and accommodation was agreed in many areas, while Mr Trimble and Mr Paisley were on holiday.
"It is obvious also that the unionist leadership have a conditional and opportunistic approach to the critical issue of dialogue. When it challenges the status quo and raises the potential of real change they seek to avoid, to prevaricate or reject it.
"So too with the Mitchell principles. Because of the crisis within loyalism, Mr Trimble and Mr Paisley are now questioning the right of the loyalist parties to attend the talks at Stormont. They ignore their own blatant flouting of the Mitchell principles in July."
"On their own the unionist leaders will not at this time engage positively in any process which can bring a lasting peace, because such a process must inevitably bring about change.
"It is the responsibility of the two governments, the other parties, and those elements within unionism who regret the squandering of recent opportunities, to apply themselves to this task," said Mr Adams.
