Ben Lowry: It is hypocritical and outrageous of Ireland to sue the UK on Legacy

Opinion by Ben Lowry, Belfast News Letter, March 30th, 2025

This newspaper has been reporting on legacy outrage after outrage for 10 years and the response is almost always the same: a brief flurry of uproar at some latest grotesque legal or investigative historic victory for the IRA, followed by sluggishness and indifference.

In no time the anti-security force legacy juggernaut is back on track, with millions found for some new probe or other into allegations against a UK state that prevented civil war. Gerry Adams winning the prospect of damages for his internment is a recent example. The inquest finding against the SAS for stopping an IRA murder gang at Clonoe in 1992 is another.

The reaction to that verdict in Westminster was one of justified fury, and even now has finally caused the Labour government, which since it came to power has put itself at the helm of the legacy imbalance, to snap. (Keir Starmer and Hilary Benn had soon after taking office begun to reverse the attempt of the last government to prevent Mr Adams getting damages, had overturned the last government decision not to spend millions more investigating the murder of Pat Finucane, one victim of the Troubles among 4,000, and restored the sort of inquests into allegations against state killings of Clonoe was an example).

News of the government’s legal challenge to the Clonoe inquest findings of Mr Justice Humphreys happened after last Saturday’s News Letter had gone to press, and on Monday we ran a 3,000 word critique of that contemptible verdict written by Jeff Dudgeon.

But I still think that there are few examples that more perfectly illustrate this legacy scandal than Ireland in 2023 deciding to take the UK to the European Court of Human Rights over its plan in the Legacy Act to halt legacy inquests, civil cases (which are also almost all against the security forces) and criminal prosecutions for Troubles killings.

Gove gave Dublin the Green Light to sue

It is hard to know where to begin when trying to assess who was to blame for this case. Unionists hardly helped matters by repeatedly letting the Irish government and others including Labour in opposition cite “all the political parties in NI oppose to the Legacy Act”. This newspaper urged unionists to make clear that their position was not a shared one with Sinn Fein, but was in fact one of contempt for an amnesty for republican terrorist violence, and contempt for an Irish state that so helped the IRA by refusing to extradite them, even after the UK agreed the Anglo Irish Agreement in 1985, naively thinking that Dublin would help it on security. Thus unionists put themselves in the position that Ireland could say it was defending their interests.

Another person who has questions to answer about this atrocious Irish legal action is Michael Gove, who as a then senior UK cabinet minister was in Dublin shortly before Ireland decided to take its case and was asked about that possibility. He said: “We know and understand the Irish government’s position, and we respect the autonomy of the decision-making process within the Irish government.”

He did, in fairness, go on to say: “We, I think it is clear, believe it would be preferable not for a case to be taken forward.” He was in classically understated British diplomatic language saying that suing the UK would be a silly thing to do, but then further said that any Irish decision “in no way leads to any deterioration or difficulty in any of the other conversations that we have”

I believe that he gave Dublin the sense that it had a green light to sue.

Leo Varadkar, the then taoiseach, said that Ireland had made “a commitment to survivors in Northern Ireland and to the families of victims that we would stand by them”.

Victims of Sectarian Violence

Which families? The families of nationalist victims of violence? That is a very important category of victims, many of whom were murdered by loyalists for being Catholic. It is true that the Irish government has been very active in supporting such victims, which is in stark contrast to the UK’s abject failure to give significant support to victims of the IRA. But Ireland has given no support at all to that latter group. In fact it has stonewalled victims of Kingsmills and others, now including victims of Omagh (Ireland has just given some useless pledge to help the public inquiry into that republican bomb atrocity, one of so many such car bombs).

But, worse, Ireland’s extradition refusals during the Troubles helped facilitate (inadvertently) the massacre of hundreds of Protestants along the border. How on earth has this stubborn, and I believe deeply sectarian, refusal over 25+ years not been subject to a moment of scrutiny when the UK state is being pulled apart by detailed and vindictive Troubles probes?

I am sorry to say that among the DUP and UK government failures in the Stormont House legacy deal of 2014 was to have no proposed vehicle to examine Ireland’s Troubles culpability. Yet that state, which got off the hook for its role in the past, then has the sheer nerve to sue Britain.

Undeclared amnesty for IRA

But there is a reason the Irish legal action is even worse than that sounds. Dublin has pursued a very obvious policy of undeclared amnesty towards the IRA, just as Britain itself has done for IRA leaders like Martin McGuinness. The former Irish justice minister Michael McDowell said that from 1998 to 2006 Sinn Féin had “incessantly demanded” immunity from criminal prosecution for IRA members and the Irish government of which he was a part decided “that further investigation and prosecution by An Garda Síochána of such historic offences was no longer warranted or justified by reason of the greater interest”.

So Ireland pursued this amnesty yet has been allowed to sue the UK.

The response to it from London has been lamentable. The last Tory government was at least openly critical of it and wrote to Dublin requesting information on its past legacy investigations. But it did not take the sort of unilateral action that I have long recommended to re-balance all the huge investigations into the UK state.

It could have started with just two: a massive inquiry into the IRA, who led it, who helped it, and the harm it did. And a major investigation into Irish extradition policy and the harm it caused. Dublin would not have helped that probe, of course not. So what? They are suing us – the flagrant hypocrites.

But Labour has been far worse, and has proudly reset relations with Ireland, including the recent summit involving the highest levels of the UK government, and has not pushed back at all against this legal case.

It is expected that Ireland will drop the action soon, but even so: the feeble response to it has been a betrayal of our country and its restrained response to decades of IRA murder and mayhem.

Organisers of ‘hut of hate’ linked pyre in anti-social behaviour vow

Connla Young, Crime and Security Correspondent, Irish News, March 31st, 2025

THE organisers of a bonfire where its builders had a den displayed with sectarian, Nazi and violent images have pledged to oppose “anti-social behaviour”.

Those behind Clonduff bonfire, located close to Lisnasharragh Leisure Centre in east Belfast, are among a group of eight pyre sites in the wider area to sign a joint statement.

Other prominent bonfire sites include Avoniel, Pitt Park, and Braniel.

Green Party councillor Brian Smyth has now urged loyalists to abandon bonfires and replace them with environmentally friendly beacons.

The Clonduff pyre site is one of the most notorious in the north, with a builder’s den previously located beside the bonfire branded the ‘hut of hate’.

In 2023, images from inside the hut showed the letters ‘UVF’ etched onto a makeshift table along with a swastika made from tape located inches away.

A flag dedicated to the 36th (Ulster) Division, which fought against Germany in World War One, was also hung in the hut just feet away from the Nazi tribute.

Nearby, the letters KAT (Kill All Taigs) were scrawled on to a sofa along with an obscene image. The hut also contained a flag bearing an image of a crouching masked man holding a rocket launcher with the words ‘Clonduff Rocket Team’.

A similar flag was hung from a nearby lamppost last year.

A £150,000 soccer pitch located close to the pyre site was closed for seven months last year after damage was caused during construction.

In 2022, a five-a-side pitch was closed due to fire damage while Belfast City Council has been forced to put up expensive protective coverings in the area.

In their statement, the bonfire organisers reaffirmed their “commitment to safe, well-maintained bonfire sites, free from anti-social behaviour”.

“We stand united against vandalism, fly-tipping, and any actions that undermine our celebrations,” they said.

“The bonfire tradition is one that should unite our community, not divide it, and we are committed to protecting its integrity.”

The bonfire builders say they are “dedicated to educating the wider community, particularly younger generations, about the historical significance of bonfires and the role they play in shaping our local culture”.

“This understanding is crucial for cultivating pride in the tradition and making sure it is celebrated with respect and understanding,” they say.

The statement urges those organising bonfire events to take responsibility “to make sure these celebrations are safe, respectful, and contribute positively to the community”.

Work on this year’s bonfire at Clonduff has begun, with dozens of pallets already gathered close to two soccer pitches.

Beacons are Better

Mr Smyth spoke of his preference for beacons.

“It’s good to see efforts being made to reduce tensions and improve bonfire safety, but as Greens in

Belfast, we believe it’s time to move towards beacons,” he said.

“Beacons are a safer, more environmentally friendly option that can still allow loyalist culture to be celebrated in a meaningful way.”

He said he regularly speaks with unionists and loyalist residents “who feel it’s time to move away from large-scale bonfires”.

“These bonfires often bring anti-social behaviour and leave people feeling trapped in their homes for months ahead of the Twelfth of July,” he said.

A hut used by bonfire builders

“Transitioning to beacons offers a chance to preserve tradition while creating a safer, cleaner, and more inclusive environment for everyone.”

Ministers will stop Sinn Fein 'pet projects', says Robinson

Andrew Madden, Belfast Telegraph, March 31st, 2025

DUP leader will “put a marker down” to stop public money being used to “further Sinn Fein's pet projects”.

Gavin Robinson made the comments in reference to planned spending on Irish language signage at Belfast Grand Central Station, in his weekly email which slammed Chancellor Rachel Reeves' spending plans as a further sign of the Government's “reckless approach that will leave hardworking families and businesses worse off”.

In her Spring Budget, the Labour minister confirmed significant cuts to welfare spending and public services, alongside an increase in defence spending.

But Mr Robinson told subscribers to his weekly email that the Government should instead be focusing on cutting waste, reducing “unnecessary” spending and ensuring “fairness” for taxpayers.

Pointing to Sinn Fein Infrastructure Minister Liz Kimmins' plans to have bilingual signage installed at Translink's biggest transport hub at a cost of around £150,000, the East Belfast MP said the money “could have been used to support struggling businesses in Sandy Row, which have been devastated by the station's impact, or to fix the potholes that plague our roads.”

“Our team on the Executive have written to the DfI Minister expressing their opposition to this decision and questioning the process for this decision being made,” Mr Robinson added.

“Once again, we see Sinn Fein's approach to equality laid bare, and that their partisan pet projects take priority over the wider public good.

Partisan Projects

“This is clearly a controversial matter and our Ministers will use their position at the Executive table to not only get to the bottom of how the decision was made but put a marker down that public money cannot be used to further Sinn Fein's pet projects.

“I believe we need to put taxpayers first. Ensuring public services are delivered fairly and with efficiency.”

The signs at Grand Central Station will be accompanied by digital displays on ticket machines.

While the move has been welcomed by Irish language campaigners, many unionists have hit out at the spending.

A legal challenge to the decision has also been laid.

Under Stormont rules, ministerial decisions that are deemed significant or controversial should be considered collectively by the whole Executive, rather than by individual ministers.

Ms Kimmins has previously defended the move to install Irish signs at the largest bus and train station on the island of Ireland insisting the language “is a living and thriving language used daily by many people across the north”.

In answer to a query on the decision-making process, a Department for Infrastructure spokesperson confirmed that the decision was taken by Ms Kimmins and not Translink.

No macho agenda

In his missive, Mr Robinson also hit out at First Minister Michelle O'Neill's description of an increase in UK defence spending being part of a “macho agenda of militarisation”, as well as the Republic of Ireland's policy of neutrality.

“One priority that is to be welcomed in the Spring Statement in the commitment to defence spending. This reflects the strength of the United Kingdom, a nation that stands together to protect its interests at home and abroad,” he said.

“In contrast, the Irish Republic maintains a position of neutrality, yet when security threats arise, they rely on the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force to safeguard their interests and deep-sea cables. Their ongoing debate around neutrality is one that goes to the conscience of a country.

The DUP leader said foreign aggression, threat or war “is not something any nation chooses” and the choice to “act or stand by as a spectator” in response is “ultimately a matter of conscience”.

“The UK has always chosen to stand firm in defence of freedom and security, and Northern Ireland plays its part in that shared duty,” Mr Robinson continued.

“This isn't, as Michelle O'Neill described, a 'macho agenda of militarisation', it's about preparing to protect not just our freedoms, but those of others.”

The Sinn Fein vice president said the Chancellor's statement comes at a time when the public sector is “on its knees” and the health service is in dire need of investment.

“This is a time for our own administration to fight back hard against this militarisation agenda,” Ms O'Neill added.

“This does not serve the interests of the people here.”

DUP deputy First Minister Emma Little-Pengelly insisted defence spending is a “necessity”.

Meanwhile, Sinn Féin's National Chairperson Declan Kearney MLA said the Irish language “is thriving in communities across the island”.

“That is reflected in the official recognition which it now enjoys both in the south and north of Ireland, despite a history of persecution and discrimination, particularly under unionist one-party rule,” he added.

“Sinn Féin fully supports the rights of Gaeilgeoirí as we continue to build a society underpinned by rights and respect for all.”

Pensioner denied Troubles pension despite panel finding she “suffered grievously”

Irish News, March 31, 2025 at 6:00am BST

An elderly woman whose husband was shot dead more than 50 years ago has been turned down for a Troubles’ pension despite a panel finding she “suffered grievously”.

Mary Hull (73) has described the recent decision by the Victims Pension Board (VPB) as an “insult”.

The 73-year-old was left widowed at the age of 21 with two young children, aged three and one, when her husband James Trainor was shot dead by the UVF at the west Belfast filling station where he worked in January 1973.

Established in 2021, the board determines applications under the Troubles Permanent Disablement Payment Scheme, which is sometimes referred to as the Victims’ Payments Scheme.

Only 20 of 3,000 applications processed

Troubles pension applicants told just 20 of estimated 30,000 applications processed before Christmas.

I will fight on for the young girl I was back then, says woman left traumatised by her husband's death.

Ms Hull had appealed an earlier decision to reject her claim because “she was not present at the incident or in its immediate aftermath”.

In dismissing her appeal, the board said it has “no power under the regulations in respect of those who were bereaved during the Troubles unless they satisfy the criteria regarding presence”.

The Co Armagh native had told pension scheme staff how her father had identified her murdered husband.

She also revealed that when his body was returned, she can remember seeing “bullet holes in his head” and described how an undertaker had “tried to stuff them with cotton wool and had covered the wounds with a thick, yellowish make-up”.

She added that an attempt had been made to pull curls in her husband’s hair down to “cover the wounds”.

Images will never leave her

Ms Hull found this upsetting and revealed the images are “deeply ingrained into her memory and will never leave her”.

The pensioner has argued that had police come to her home before her husband died, she could have been with him.

She believes she was denied an opportunity to be with her husband in the aftermath of the shooting and “it was through the inactions of others” she has been turned down.

“Because I was not present at the scene, I’m not entitled to the Troubles pension,” she said.

“I’m 73 now and 52 years of fighting them and I can’t change the law.

“As if I was not traumatised enough.”

Ms Hull said her treatment was a “insult” and added that she will “try and get this law changed”.

Nesbitt and Lord Eames supported her application

She has received letters of support from Stormont health minister Mike Nesbitt and Lord Robin Eames, ex-Church of Ireland Archbishop of Armagh.

UUP leader Mr Nesbitt, a former victims’ commissioner, said the grandmother is “always thinking of others despite her own deep hurt and heartbreak” and referenced “the continued support she has provided to others”.

Lord Eames referenced the “efforts the Appellant has made over the years to recognise the needs of widows following the Troubles”.

Ms Hull was assessed by a consultant clinical psychologist who confirmed she suffers from a major depressive disorder as a result of the incident.

A spokesperson for the Victims’ Payments Board says: “While we are unable to make any comment on individual cases, we are pleased that the appeal process which exists to maximise an applicant’s chances of receiving a just assessment of their case has indeed been shown to work well.

“We would remind all applicants for a Troubles Permanent Disablement Payment that they have recourse to the appeal process if they are not satisfied with an outcome.”