Our unpublished letter to the Irish Times responding to Sir Declan Morgan’s defence of the ICRIR after NI Appeal Court questioned its ability to deliver Truth and Justice to Victims and Survivors

Unpublished Letter responding to Sir Declan Morgan’s Letter in the Irish Times on Monday, September 30th, 2024

(followed by text of Sir Declan’s letter)

Sir,

The letter to the Irish Times from Sir Declan Morgan, Chief Commissioner, Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery, yesterday (September 24th, 2024) is to be welcomed in so far as he clearly states his continuing commitment to ‘Getting answers to provide the unvarnished truth’ about the Troubles, which ‘is critical if we are to promote reconciliation’.

As he says, ‘Promoting rights-based reconciliation is fundamental if young people are to understand the brutality and horror of settling differences through violence’. The alternative is to perpetuate rival mythologies that still promote division on this island. 

He also stated that he would welcome ‘legislative clarity’ in the forthcoming Labour Government Bill that will replace the current Legacy Act.

The changes in the legislation are of course paramount if the ICRIR is to be accepted as genuinely independent across the communities that constitute Northern Ireland. The fact that some families, such as that of Seamus Bradley, a teenage IRA Volunteer shot by the British Army in Operation Motorman in 1972, believe the Commission provides the means of getting to the truth shows that there are many victims and survivors whose primary concern is to find out what happened, why and who was responsible is more important than fighting Legacy battles in the courts.

However, the reality is that many victims and survivors won’t engage with the ICRIR unless there are further changes to the legislation. We believe that a provision for conditional amnesties that allow former combatants to provide full disclosure of their own activities to victims and survivors who suffered as a result of their activities without incriminating others must be part of the new legislation. They would also have to be willing to engage fully with victims and their families if the latter so chose.

This will not of course be palatable to many victims and survivors and therefore must only apply to cases where families agreed. Ideally it should also include joint judicial oversight by an Irish Government representative. For those who did opt for a process based on mediation and reconciliation, at least on the facts of what happened, it would provide for much fuller accounts of what happened and why than battles in a legal arena.

The first step in reconciliation at either a personal or community level is reconciling the facts of who was involved, why they were involved and what they did, or didn’t do.

All of the legal alternatives mean consigning the vast majority off cases, including miscarriages of justice, certainly for the vast majority to oblivion.

Yours etc,

Harry Donaghy, Northern Chair

John Green, Southern Chair

Padraig Yeates, Secretary.

Promoting rights-based reconciliation

Sir, – Last Friday in Belfast, the Northern Ireland Appeal Court ruled on the independence of the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR), and the effectiveness of the legislation operated by ICRIR.

Firstly, the appeal court clearly and unequivocally declared that the ICRIR is an appropriately independent public authority, both operationally and organisationally, endorsing Mr Justice Colton’s previous High Court judgment in that regard.

Secondly, the appeal court endorsed the ability of the ICRIR to require production of all information necessary to deliver effective investigations for victims, survivors and families in the following terms: “In alignment with the trial judge, we recognise the wide powers of ICRIR and the benefit of having investigations placed within one body which is well-resourced and committed to providing outcomes within a reasonable time frame. We further note that the ICRIR has unfettered access to all information, documents, and materials as it reasonably requires in connection with a review. These are powers akin to those exercised by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) and the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland (PONI) when conducting legacy investigations and cannot be criticised, nor should they be underestimated.”

This is a determination which now should be respected by all. It draws a line under the unwarranted attacks against the commission’s independence, staffed by professional and dedicated public servants from every community background.

Thirdly, the ICRIR has consistently highlighted the benefits of improved and enhanced operating legislation. While we attempted to use creative mechanisms to implement the current law in a human-rights compliant way, an attempt which the appeal court considered could not overcome the deficiencies in the legislation, we have also consistently welcomed more legislative clarity about our powers.

Dealing with the legacy of the past in Northern Ireland has been contested and delayed.

Achieving the confidence of the community, particularly those victims, survivors and families who have been let down and disappointed for so many years, requires commitment and delivery.

Getting answers to provide the unvarnished truth is critical if we are to promote reconciliation. Promoting rights-based reconciliation is fundamental if young people are to understand the brutality and horror of settling differences through violence.

We will continue endeavouring with the British government, the Irish government, all sides of the community, and particularly victims, survivors and families, to deliver this objective. – Yours, etc,

Sir DECLAN MORGAN,

Chief Commissioner,

Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery,

Belfast.