Clonoe - has inquest revived divisions in North?

Over 50% of people in NI opposed to Troubles amnesty for security forces, poll suggests

The results show that 54% are opposed to an Amnesty and 41% are in favour.

Broken down by political allegiances the results show nationalist voters are overwhelmingly opposed to amnesties (96%-98%) while unionist voters are almost as heavily in support (75%-91%).

Opposition is greatest among younger voters.

This contrasts with a poll conducted for the Centre for Irish Studies at Liverpool University in 2023 which showed that 60% of nationalists believed immunity should be granted to former combatants in return for disclosing truth to victims and survivors and the figure was 48.4% among unionists.

While the polls are not directly comparable they do indicate that attitudes have hardened within traditional electoral blocks.

Almost exclusive reliance on the courts to achieve Truth and Justice suggests this is being achieved at the expense of reconciliation.

Under the survey’s findings is the Executive Summary from a submission by Dr Austen Morgan of the Malone House Group to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee of the House of Commons. Dr Morgan argues that the Northern Ireland judiciary has misinterpreted the Legacy Act and that the UK has complied fully with Article 2 of the Northern Ireland protocol/Windsor framework. On this basis, her argues that the Secretary of State’s appeal should be allowed by the Supreme Court.

The full submission is on the House of Commons website, Ref [LPN0001]

Adrian Rutherford, Sunday Life, February 23rd, 2025

People in Northern Ireland are marginally opposed to the security forces being granted immunity from prosecution for Troubles-era incidents, a poll suggests.

Some 54% were against an amnesty, with 41% in favour, according to the LucidTalk survey.

The findings come in the wake of a coroner ruling SAS soldiers were unjustified in shooting dead four IRA men at Clonoe in Co Tyrone.

Kevin Barry O'Donnell (21), Sean O'Farrell (22), Peter Clancy (21) and Patrick Vincent (20) were killed minutes after they carried out a gun attack on Coalisland RUC station in February 1992. Last week the coroner said he would refer his findings to the prosecution service.

Amid a political row over security force personnel ending up in the dock, the previous Conservative government introduced legislation to end all prosecutions related to the Troubles prior to 1998.

However, it is being repealed by Labour over claims it handed a de facto amnesty to terrorists.

The LucidTalk poll for Sunday Life shows people are deeply divided on immunity for the security forces.

Just over 3,000 people took part in our online survey from February 14-17.

It showed DUP voters were overwhelmingly in favour of immunity (91%), with just 5% against and 4% offering no opinion.

Support was similarly high among UUP voters — 75% were in favour of immunity.

But 98% of Sinn Fein and 96% of SDLP supporters said they were against any amnesty for the police and Army.

More than three-quarters (77%) of Alliance voters are also against immunity, with 13% in favour and 10% unsure.

In general, older voters tend to lean towards immunity — 59% of 55- to 64-year-olds backed this, compared to 30% of 18- to 34-year-olds.

Females are less supportive — 35% back immunity with 57% against. For males, it was 46% in favour and 50% against.

The Clonoe case is likely to reopen the debate.

Obliged by Law

The SAS soldiers opened fire as the men arrived at St Patrick's Church car park in a stolen lorry they had used in the police station attack.

The inquest into the circumstances of the killings, which opened in 2023, found up to 570 rounds were fired by the soldiers.

In his findings, Mr Justice Humphreys, who is a High Court judge, said the use of force in the ambush was not justified and the soldiers did not have an honest belief it was necessary to prevent loss of life.

On Thursday the coroner said he is obliged by law to send a report to the Director of Public Prosecutions if an inquest he is presiding over discloses evidence that indicates a criminal offence may have been committed.

When a referral from a coroner is received by the DPP, prosecutors consider if any further investigative steps are required before a decision can be taken as to whether a prosecution will be pursued.

Under the current legal framework for dealing with Troubles legacy cases, criminal investigations can only be undertaken by the recently established Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR).

The news sparked a backlash from unionists.

DUP leader Gavin Robinson said prosecutors should focus on the IRA members involved in the attack on Coalisland station before the men were killed.

Comment

Because younger people have to brain washed into thinking that the Brits were baddies and the Provos were goodie. 

Dr Andrew Charles BA (Hons) MM; MRes

UK has complied fully with Article 2 of the NI protocol/Windsor framework.

Written evidence submitted by Dr Austen Morgan to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee of the House of Commons, relating to the British Government’s new approach to addressing the legacy of the past in Northern Ireland [LPN0001]

Executive Summary

This submission discusses an important secretary-of-state-for-Northern-Ireland appeal to the supreme court, regarding the 2019 European Union/United Kingdom withdrawal agreement; if the appeal fails, Northern Ireland will be deemed to have a particular constitution (separating it from the United Kingdom to a greater extent than the so- called Irish sea [trade] border). It is that important.

I argue two essential preliminary points to this appeal to assist the secretary of state: one, the dualist nature of the United Kingdom state, with its domestic law and then international law (including European Union law); and two, the 1998 Belfast agreement (which led to devolution in Northern Ireland), as having a political face and a different legal face. These preliminary points have not been considered adequately by judges in Northern Ireland.

This submission turns principally on the nature of the 2019 withdrawal agreement: is it a bilateral treaty (as I suggest) between the European Union and the United Kingdom; or is it a part of European Union law, as the Northern Ireland judges seem to have assumed? The answers to particular questions – discussed below - flow from this major submission on the legal nature of that instrument.

An important question in the case is the meaning of article 2 of the Northern Ireland protocol/Windsor framework. Article 2 provides in full (in these two indented paragraphs):

(1) The United Kingdom shall ensure that no diminution of rights, safeguards or equality of opportunity, as set out in that part of the 1998 Agreement entitled Rights, Safeguards and Equality of Opportunity results from its withdrawal from the [European] Union, including in the area of protection against discrimination, as enshrined in the provisions of Union Law listed in Annex 1 to this Protocol and shall implement this paragraph through dedicated mechanisms.

(2) The United Kingdom shall continue to facilitate the related work of the institutions and bodies set up pursuant to the 1998 Agreement, including the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland and the Joint Committee of Representatives of the Human Rights Commission of Northern Ireland and Ireland, in upholding human rights and equality standards.

I submit that: the Northern Ireland courts have misconstrued article 2 of the Northern Ireland protocol/Windsor framework: first, how it might have been incorporated into domestic law and given direct effect (if at all); and second, the use of a so-called six- elements test derived by Dame Siobhan Keegan LCJ in May 2023 (in an earlier case), to construe the provision broadly.

There are two propositions in article 2(1), quoted above: ‘no diminution’ etc; and annex 1 (containing European Union anti-discrimination law). As regards ‘no diminution’, the Human Rights Act 1998 continued in force in Northern Ireland after Brexit. As for annex 1, Northern Ireland’s separate equality legislation also continued in force there after Brexit. The two United Kingdom bodies in article 2(2) – the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland - also remained in existence through Brexit.

The third body is not a United Kingdom institution, being a form of cooperation between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, and therefore a matter under the Belfast agreement and not the 2019 withdrawal agreement. This was an extraordinary mistake by Brussels.

[Ed Note: This is a reference to the British Government’s Human Rights Act being included in the Brexit withdrawal agreement rather than being left in the remit of the two governments under the Belfast Good Friday Agreement’]

The United Kingdom state, I conclude, has complied fully with article 2 of the Northern Ireland protocol/Windsor framework. The secretary of state’s appeal should be allowed by the supreme court.

[LPN0001]