British government plan on past says ‘small’ chance of justice for Troubles killings

Tánaiste Simon Coveney has delivered a chilly response to a new British government plan on how to deal with the past.

Northern Secretary Brandon Lewis has proposed a new single body that would primarily focus on information recovery and reconciliation rather than investigating Troubles-related killings.

While Mr Lewis in a written statement to the House of Commons on Wednesday didn't totally rule out investigating some past killings he said he wants to end "the cycle of reinvestigations into the Troubles in Northern Ireland that has failed victims and [British army] veterans alike".

“While there must always be a route to justice, experience suggests that the likelihood of justice in most cases may now be small, and continues to decrease as time passes,” he said.

Welcome committee set up for asylum seekers arriving in Co Kerry

---

Coronavirus: 74 new cases confirmed in the Republic

---

Coronavirus: Some HSE home care may be withdrawn because of pandemic

---

Locals fear for future of Trump’s Doonbeg golf resort after sea wall planning refusal

---

Figures issues by the PSNI late last year showed that the PSNI Legacy Investigation Branch had a caseload of 1,130 cases touching on the deaths of 1,421 people. Of these 583 deaths were attributed to republicans, 294 deaths to loyalists, 289 deaths to the British army, 51 to police, 69 were unknown attribution and 135 were non-paramilitary related deaths.

Mr Lewis said the proposals were "consistent with the principles of the Stormont House Agreement" although Sinn Féin and the SDLP said they were a "violation" of the December 2014 British-Irish agreement – a view with which Mr Coveney appeared to concur.

The Stormont House Agreement proposed a historical investigation unit to investigate Troubles killings; an independent commission on information retrieval where perpetrators could tell the truth about their involvement in Troubles killings without fear of prosecution; and an oral history archive where victims and others could tell their stories of the conflict.

But under Mr Lewis’s plan one independent body would be established to deal with the past. Mr Lewis said there would be a “greater emphasis on gathering information for families; moving at a faster pace to retrieve knowledge before it is lost; and doing more to help individuals and society to share and understand the tragic experiences of the past”.

He added, “This body will oversee and manage both the information recovery and investigative aspects of the legacy system, and provide every family with a report with information concerning the death of their loved one.”

Mr Lewis made clear that he expected that very few cases would lead to prosecutions. “The government is committed to the rule of law but given the considerable time that has elapsed since many of these incidents took place it is vital that we swiftly implement an effective information recovery mechanism before this information is lost forever,” he said.

“Only cases in which there is a realistic prospect of a prosecution as a result of new compelling evidence would proceed to a full police investigation and if necessary, prosecution,” he said.

Mr Lewis added, “Cases which do not reach this threshold, or subsequently are not referred for prosecution, would be closed and no further investigations or prosecutions would be possible – though family reports would still be provided to the victims’ loved ones. Such an approach would give all participants the confidence and certainty to fully engage with the information recovery process.”

In a careful but negative response the Minister for Foreign Affairs Mr Coveney said the “Stormont House Agreement framework is the way forward” on these issues.

“It was agreed by both governments and the political parties after intensive negotiations, and it must be implemented,” he added.

Mr Lewis's written statement on Wednesday comes in the wake of continuing pressure, some of it exerted by British prime minister Boris Johnson, to create legislation that would prevent prosecutions of former British soldiers in relation to Troubles-related killings.

Mr Coveney said there should be “effective investigations into all Troubles-related deaths, regardless of the perpetrator”.

“We would not support a proposal to introduce any special measure or treatment, regarding investigation of state or non-state actors in Northern Ireland,” he said.

“Victims and survivors have had to wait for far too long for a suitable and effective system in Northern Ireland to deal with the legacy of the Troubles,” he added.

The Sinn Féin Deputy First Minister Michelle O’Neill said there could “be no hierarchy of victims and no one, including British state forces, can be above the law”.

She said the proposals were “unacceptable” and would “cause hurt and anger among families who lost loved ones during the conflict”.

The Ulster Unionist Party MLA Doug Beattie gave a “cautious welcome” to the new proposals. He said, “For too many people - most notably republicans, some self-appointed guardians of human rights and certain law firms keen to exploit ‘lawfare’ – the entire legacy process presented an opportunity to rewrite history and paint the [British] state and its actors as the villains of the piece at the UK government’s own expense.”

The SDLP leader Colum Eastwood said the proposals were wrong and would "cause an immense amount of hurt to victims and survivors and to families who have lost loved ones".

He added, “This is not about dealing with the past ethically, it is not about delivering truth, justice and reconciliation. This is about shutting down justice and shielding former soldiers from fulsome investigation indefinitely.”

Mark Thompson, head of the Relatives for Justice group, which represents many bereaved seeking justice and truth, said, "It is clear in this statement that the British government is trying to get away scot free from its role in the conflict. This will be resisted and challenged."

Grainne Teggart of Amnesty Northern Ireland said Mr Lewis's proposals were an attempt to "close down paths to justice".