Madam, – A report by Gerry Moriarty in your edition of February 26th quotes Mr Denis Bradley, co-chair of the Consultative Group on the Past, as telling the Westminster Northern Ireland Affairs Committee that I had misinterpreted recommendations made by the group.
Specifically, he rejected my concern, previously reported by Frank Millar, that it would be a revolutionary departure from the common law “for any commission or tribunal to adjudicate on a person’s alleged behaviour” without a person accused of serious wrongdoing or criminality having the right to face their accuser and to challenge them by means of questioning by their lawyer.
When questioned about this by Mrs Iris Robinson MP, Mr Bradley reportedly replied: “In the truth recovery [proposals] there is no placing of blame on any individual. This is clear in the report: there is placing of blame on organisations and that is completely different.”
I have the highest regard for Mr Bradley and his equally distinguished colleagues, but I do not believe that his prediction will be borne out by events if the recommendations in question are implemented.
On pages 147 and 148 of the report the purpose and powers of the “Thematic Examination Unit” are set out. It is expressly stated that its role would be to examine “linked or thematic cases” which are defined as “cases [that] have raised particular concern or are linked by the circumstances of death, or by the possible identity of the culprits, or touch on themes, such as areas of paramilitary activity or alleged collusion”. It is inconceivable that the drawing of conclusions in such cases could do other than involve the determination of the culpability of individuals.
Indeed, the group recognises this by referring on page 148 to the need for participants to have access to independent legal advice and the right to legal representation. My point was, and remains, that the safeguards for those individuals proposed by the group are patently inadequate. – Yours, etc,