Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the representatives of Amnesty International to the committee. There is a cliché that we cannot change the past but there is agreement that our attitudes to the past can change. That is important. We all accept we have been changed and hurt by the conflict but also by the peace process. It is an important message about this report. The witnesses say there is failure to agree on aspects of the Haass proposals. Where is the problem? The Unionists have problems with it but they have not said publicly what the problem is. How do the witnesses believe we can move beyond Haass on this point? Sinn Féin shares the belief that the Haass proposals provide a further step to move things forward through recovery for survivors. We believe the process proposed should be enacted. In the view of the SDLP and the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland, there is potential for agreement, but the Unionists have stalled it.

The Good Friday Agreement, the Weston Park agreement, the St. Andrews Agreement and other agreements include the rights and entitlements of victims. Does Amnesty International have a view on the failure of the governments, as guarantors of the agreement, to have a public inquiry into the Pat Finucane murder and the refusal of the British Government to provide evidence and information on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, the delivery of a bill of rights, the Irish language, the civic forum and the lack of powers in respect of human rights? The witnesses talked about the difficulties of the piecemeal approach to victims in the North. Do the witnesses accept there is also a piecemeal approach to victims in the South and victims in Britain? How do we approach that? Should there be an all-encompassing agreement in respect of how we approach victims of the conflict? People were bereaved and injured in this State and elsewhere, yet there is a disparity. Families in the State have initiated investigations by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland in respect of the failings of the RUC, yet there is no similar system for a GSOC investigation of the Garda Síochána. The same applies to historic inquiries. People have difficulties with that. There is a lack of support to victims and victims' advocates. Should we look at the issue of victims and truth overall? I do not see why we cannot have truth recovery in respect of people in Britain. Will the Brits open up their political and military archives in respect of their involvement? I cannot see that happening.

The on-the-runs were mentioned in respect of the John Downey case. My understanding is that letters of impunity were not an amnesty and only mean the person is not wanted on the basis of the evidence available at that time. It is not an amnesty. The witness said there was difficulty with the Downey case and people are saying this was a secret deal. The Unionists claimed they were not aware of it, but it was discussed with Unionists and they were fully aware of it. People are playing games. It was one of the outstanding aspects of the Weston Park agreement and there was acceptance that we had to address the issue and move on. No one is talking about an amnesty. The letters mean that when the letters were published, no information could implicate these people through the courts.