RELATIVES OF Omagh bomb victims could receive just £2,500 (€3,100) each in compensation if they win their civil action, the High Court in Belfast heard yesterday.
The potential payouts were disclosed as a defence barrister claimed it would have been impossible for the families to sue five men over the atrocity without financial backing from the British government.
Mary Higgins QC, for Colm Murphy and Séamus Daly, also urged Mr Justice Morgan to adopt the highest standard of proof at the hearings in Belfast into the 1998 Real IRA attack.
Even though the relatives’ lawyers have declared they will be seeking the most punitive, exemplary damages as part of a multi-million pound claim, Ms Higgins argued this was normally reserved for cases against the state.
Moreover, she insisted the action against her clients and co-defendants Michael McKevitt, Liam Campbell and Séamus McKenna was not about a desire for compensation.
“The primary motivation is to hold the people, or some of the people, they believe were involved in the Omagh bombing to account and to punish them in the most severe way for the rest of their lives,” she claimed.
Setting out her case on day 13 of the action, Ms Higgins said that government funding of the families’ legal bill now stood at about £1.6 million plus VAT.
She said: “If those costs are not recovered from the defendants, who are all legally aided, then any damages that the plaintiffs receive, whether from Real IRA funds . . . in America or otherwise are going to be clawed back by the government.
“So the maximum any plaintiff is going to receive is the sum of £2,500 in compensation.”
The court also heard extracts from a series of press interviews with the families’ London-based solicitor Jason McCue where he explained the reasoning behind taking the suspects to court.
Frustration with the lack of progress in the criminal investigation, a desire to name and shame, and showing victims groups they could bring the fight to terrorists were all cited in articles ranging from the Washington Times to the Tyrone Constitution.
In one article read out in court, Mr McCue referred to seeking unprecedented damages and was quoted as saying: “Some would see that as divine punishment on earth.”
Although Mr Justice Morgan told Ms Higgins that individuals were just as entitled to pursue terrorists as bad drivers through the courts, she insisted the objective here was to penalise and hold to account.
Referring to statements of support given during the families’ campaign, she added: “The government are effectively backers of this case because without this funding being given this case would not be here.”
Earlier, Michael O’Higgins SC, for McKevitt, claimed the case was almost being used as an alternative to criminal proceedings where outrage at the bombing could be expressed.
Mr O’Higgins also continued to attempt to block the introduction of FBI spy David Rupert’s evidence to the trial. It was first heard in Dublin where his client was convicted of directing terrorism.
Attacking Mr Rupert’s character, the barrister questioned his tax payments and alleged dubious and low morals when it came to making money. The case continues today.