Mr. Alan Brecknell:

I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to address this important committee at this difficult time in terms of dealing with legacy issues of the past and discussing the other important issues concerning the Good Friday Agreement.

The Pat Finucane Centre, PFC, as many members will know, offers advocacy support to victims and survivors of the conflict who wish to engage with any organisation that deals with legacy concerns. In the past these have included the RUC, the serious crime review team of the PSNI, the Historical Enquiries Team, the legacy investigation branch of the PSNI, the coronial service and the Office of the Police Ombudsman, as well as Operation Kenova and Operation Denton, which are under the command of Mr. Jon Boutcher. We also attend inquests and criminal trials to support families through these difficult processes.

Currently, the most important issue facing victims and survivors is the British Government's proposals, as released through the command paper entitled Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland's Past, which was issued on 14 July 2021. The one thing that these proposals will not do is address the legacy of the past.

As all members will be aware, these proposals as they currently stand will stop all investigations, coronial inquests and civil actions, which is completely unacceptable to the Pat Finucane Centre and the families we represent. However, probably the most outrageous proposal is a basic amnesty for all those involved in the violent conflict. The British Government can call the proposal what they like but in most fair-minded people's eyes it is an amnesty. It is interesting to note that legal academics in Queen’s University Belfast and the Committee on the Administration of Justice, which is in Belfast, in a response to the command paper stated “the proposed UK amnesty is Pinochet plus”.

It should also be noted that it is not just victims and survivors and their advocates who oppose these proposals. Unusually, the proposals have united in opposition all five political parties at Stormont even if that is for different reasons. Other opponents of the proposals are the Irish Government, the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee in Westminster, the Council of Europe's Commissioner for Human Rights and two United Nations special rapporteurs.

It should be remembered that these proposals have their origin in an ill-conceived Conservative Party manifesto promise to stop the so-called witch-hunt against veterans who served in Northern Ireland. There is no evidence to support the claim that there was a witch-hunt against the veterans. On the contrary, it should be remembered that only four soldiers were ever convicted of murder. They were all released as a result of the Queen's pardon and returned to serve in their regiments.

The command paper makes the unsubstantiated and erroneous claim that members of the security forces “were responsible for around 10% of Troubles-related deaths - the vast majority of which were lawful”. There are a number of issues around this statement. First, the figure takes no account of those killed through the collusive acts of members of the security forces. The command paper also claims that “the vast majority” of these killings were legal. This is a remarkable claim given that such a small number of members of the security forces were ever brought to trial. Therefore, how can they be judged to have been legal?

In most cases there was little or no investigation. In a recent trial of two soldiers for the killing of Mr. Joe McCann in Belfast in 1972, the presiding judge when acquitting the soldiers said that “until late 1973, an understanding was in place between the RUC [Royal Ulster Constabulary] and the Army whereby the RUC did not arrest and question, or even take witness statements from, soldiers involved in shootings such as this one”. He went on to say: “This appalling practice was designed, at least in part, to protect soldiers from being prosecuted and in very large measure it succeeded.”

For clarification purposes the Pat Finucane Centre asked the Northern Ireland Office, NIO, what information the office held, including the titles of documents and papers, that supports the claim that the “vast majority” of Troubles-related deaths at the hands of the security forces were lawful. The reply provided stated:

I can confirm that the Northern Ireland Office does not hold any records that relate to the statement to which you refer. The statement in Command Paper 498, published 14 July, is based on publicly available information that shows that, of the estimated 10% of deaths caused by the security forces during the Troubles, a very small number have been found to be unlawful.

Again, it should be remembered that only a small number of cases came before the courts and, therefore, only a small number could have been "found to have been lawful".

In conclusion, I will reiterate the PFC’s opposition to these proposals on the basis that all victims and survivors have a right to truth and justice and that these proposals will remove this right and do nothing to establish the true nature of the recent conflict or further reconciliation, one of the stated aims of the proposals.