|
|
|
IF YOU SHARE OUR CONCERNS, PLEASE WRITE TO:
Rt Hon Tony Blair MP
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
London SW1A 8AA
England
asking him to hold a public inquiry under the 1921 Tribunals of Inquiry Act
RESPONSE TO THE GOVERNMENT’S ANNOUNCEMENT OF AN INQUIRY INTO THE MURDER OF PATRICK FINUCANE
British Irish rights watch has been working for fourteen years for a public inquiry into the 1989 murder of Belfast lawyer Patrick Finucane. We therefore welcome the fact that the United Kingdom government has at long last recognised that there is “exceptional concern about this case” and has accepted that it merits an inquiry.
However, we view with the gravest foreboding its announcement that “it will be necessary to hold the inquiry on the basis of new legislation”.
New legislation is wholly unnecessary. The Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act 1921 is already in place for inquiring into matters of “urgent public importance”, a description which fits the Finucane case exactly. The 1921 Act has been used to examine serious issues which involve more than one state agency. The Finucane case involves the police, the army, the intelligence service and the government of the day.
A number of safeguards exist in order to protect the life of any state agent whose safety may be threatened by participating in a 1921 Act inquiry. Such persons can testify anonymously. They can also be screened from public view, and in extreme cases they need not even attend the inquiry, but can give their evidence by video link. We are not aware that any witness at such a public inquiry has ever been harmed.
1921 Act inquiries also incorporate a number of procedural aspects which protect the public interest, which is always engaged when such an inquiry is established. The inquiry is established by a resolution of both Houses of Parliament. It is thus a child of the whole government rather than of the ruling executive. This is especially important when, as in the Finucane case, state collusion and wrong-doing is at issue. The inquiry report is also delivered to Parliament rather than to any government minister. 1921 Act inquiries are heard in public, but when sensitive issues affecting privacy, national security and similar issues are involved, public inquiries can go into private session.
Crucially, 1921 Act inquiries are chaired by an independent judge who has all the necessary powers to subpoena witnesses and compel the production of documents and other evidence. This maintains the separation of powers between Parliament (the legislature), the executive and the courts, which is so fundamental to a developed democracy. When the government seeks to withhold evidence on, for example, grounds of national security, the judge decides whether that claim is justified or not.
Why, then, is the government planning to introduce new legislation? The answer can only be that they want to have greater control over the inquiry into Patrick Finucane’s murder, and possibly many other contentious cases as well. Paul Murphy, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, has already said that “most” of the Finucane inquiry will be held in private. This is a travesty. The Finucane case has been characterised by lies and cover-up over the past fifteen years. It is already known that at least three of those involved in his murder were agents of the state. Billy Stobie, who supplied the guns, and Ken Barrett, who was one of the gunmen, were both working for the police, and Brian Nelson, who set Finucane up for murder, was working for the army. A government minister, Douglas Hogg, apparently gave the green light for the murder when the described in the House of Commons certain solicitors as being “unduly sympathetic to the cause of the IRA”. The Finucane family and the public have the right to know how far up the chain of command and the government the plot to murder this lawyer went. Those responsible for this shocking collusion should be publicly exposed.
They also have the right to an independent hearing chaired by a judge. We suspect that the government intends to do away with the 1921 Act and instead give government ministers the power to decide whether hearings should be private, whether documents should be disclosed, and which witnesses should be allowed to testify. We wonder whether these new inquiries will even involve a judge. In cases where collusion is involved, as has been found by Judge Cory, the United Nations, and Sir John Stevens, it is simply not good enough to allow the government to investigate itself on its own terms.
We also fear that the government’s desire for secrecy means that the whole truth in the Finucane case has yet to emerge.
The government has also said that the inquiry will be “tasked with uncovering the full facts of what happened”. While that is necessary, it is also important that the inquiry examine the policies and practices that allowed the Finucane murder, and possibly many others, to take place. It is also essential that those responsible are identified and made accountable for their actions.
The government has said that the inquiry should take place “speedily”, but passing new legislation, especially if it is subjected to the careful scrutiny that will be required in this case, is a lengthy process. It is fifteen years since Patrick Finucane was murdered. Already two key witnesses, Billy Stobie and Brian Nelson, are dead. Further delay while unnecessary legislation is introduced is unjustified and unjustifiable.
The government claims that it is acting in the “public interest”. The true public interest in the Finucane case can only be served by an independent, impartial, international, transparent, judicial public inquiry without any further delay or prevarication.
Finally, we recall the words of the Weston Park agreement, which began the process which led up to the government’s announcement. The government said, “In the event that a Public Inquiry is recommended in any case [by Judge Cory], the relevant Government will implement that recommendation.” The United Kingdom government is clearly in breach of that solemn undertaking and is now acting in bad faith. This same government is holding itself up to other countries as an example of a democracy that respects human rights. It is bringing those sublime principles into disrepute by its actions in the Finucane case.
24th September 2004
TEXT OF THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2004 ANNOUNCEMENT BY PAUL MURPHY:
As I said when publishing Justice Cory’s reports, the Government is determined that where there are allegations of collusion the truth should emerge. The Government has consistently made clear that in the case of the murder of Patrick Finucane, as well as in the other cases investigated by Justice Cory, it stands by the commitment made at Weston Park.
However, in the Finucane case, an individual was being prosecuted for the murder. The police investigation by Sir John Stevens and his team continued; and it was not possible to say whether further prosecutions might follow. For that reason, the Government committed to set out the way ahead at the conclusion of prosecutions.
The prosecution of Ken Barrett has now been completed, with Barrett sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Patrick Finucane. It is still possible that further prosecutions might result from the Stevens investigation into the murder of Patrick Finucane. Nevertheless, with the Barrett trial now concluded, and following consultation with the Attorney General, who is responsible for the prosecutorial process, the Government has considered carefully the case for proceeding to an inquiry. In doing so, the Government has taken into account the exceptional concern about this case. Against that background, the Government has concluded that steps should now be taken to enable the establishment of an inquiry into the death of Patrick Finucane.
As in any inquiry, the tribunal will be tasked with uncovering the full facts of what happened, and will be given all the powers and resources necessary to fulfil that task. In order that the inquiry can take place speedily and effectively and in a way that takes into account the public interest, including the requirements of national security, it will be necessary to hold the inquiry on the basis of new legislation which will be introduced shortly.
For Peace Justice & Human Rights
