Dáil debates

Wednesday, 23 March 2005

Tribunals of Inquiry: Motion.

 

11:00 am

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann:

—noting that following agreement reached between the British and Irish Governments at Weston Park in 2001, retired Canadian Supreme Court Judge Mr. Peter Cory was appointed to undertake a thorough investigation of allegations of collusion between British and Irish security forces and paramilitaries in six incidents;

—noting that the aim of this process was to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of collusion between State security forces and those responsible for the killings in each case to warrant a public inquiry;

—noting that, as part of the Weston Park agreement, the two Governments committed themselves that in the event that a public inquiry is recommended in any case, the relevant Government will implement that recommendation;

—noting that having completed his investigation into the murder of Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Robert Buchanan, both of the Royal Ulster Constabulary RUC, Mr. Peter Cory concluded that evidence was revealed that, if accepted, could be found to constitute collusion;

—mindful that certain incidents from the past in Northern Ireland giving rise to serious allegations of collusion by security forces in each jurisdiction remain a source of grave public concern;

resolves that it is expedient that a tribunal established under the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts 1921 to 2002 to inquire into the following definite matter of urgent public importance:

—Suggestions that members of the Garda Síochána or other employees of the State colluded in the fatal shootings of RUC Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and RUC Superintendent Robert Buchanan on 20 March 1989;

and to report to the Clerk of Dáil Éireann and to make such findings and recommendations as it sees fit in relation to these matters;

and further resolves that:

(I) the tribunal shall report to the Clerk of the Dáil on an interim basis not later than three months from the date of establishment of the tribunal and as soon as may be after the tenth day of any oral hearings of the tribunal on the following matters:

(a) the number of parties granted representation by the tribunal,

(b) the progress which will then have been made in the hearings and work of the tribunal,

(c) the likely duration, so far as might then be capable of being estimated, of the proceedings of the tribunal,

(d) any other matters that the tribunal considers should be drawn to the attention of the Houses of the Oireachtas at the time of the report, including any matters relating to its terms of reference;

(II) if the tribunal finds that there is insufficient co-operation from a person(s) not compellable to give evidence pursuant to the provisions of the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts 1921 to 2002, to report that fact to the Clerk of the Dáil, including the steps taken by the tribunal to obtain the co-operation of that person(s), for consideration by the Houses of the Oireachtas, in conjunction with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, having regard to the public interest; and

(III) the inquiry shall be completed in as economical a manner as possible and at the earliest possible date consistent with a fair examination of the matters referred to it.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to table this motion seeking the establishment of a tribunal of inquiry into suggestions of collusion in the brutal and callous murders of RUC Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and RUC Superintendent Bob Buchanan by the Provisional IRA in 1989.

The background to this motion originates as far back as August 2001 when, following discussions with the Northern Ireland parties at Weston Park, the Irish and British Governments committed themselves to the appointment of a judge of international standing from outside both jurisdictions to undertake a thorough investigation of allegations of collusion between British and Irish security forces and paramilitaries in six cases. The six cases are the murders of Mr. Pat Finucane, Mr. Robert Hamill, Ms Rosemary Nelson, Mr. Billy Wright, the two RUC officers and Northern Ireland Lord Justice Maurice Gibson and Lady Cecily Gibson. The first four of these cases relate to allegations of collusion by British security forces while the other two cases relate to allegations of collusion by the Garda. Arising from the Weston Park agreement, Mr. Peter Cory, an eminent retired Canadian Supreme Court judge, was asked by the two Governments to investigate and report on the allegations of collusion. Judge Cory was appointed by the Governments in May 2002.

The aim of the inquiry process under Judge Cory was to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of collusion between State security forces and those responsible for the killings in each case to warrant a public inquiry. The resultant reports into the six cases were submitted to the Governments by Judge Cory in October 2003. On behalf of the Government, I thank and commend Judge Cory once again for his diligent and painstaking work in producing these reports. In December 2003, following Government approval, I published redacted versions of the two reports to the Government. All the redactions to the two reports were performed with the explicit consent and approval of Judge Cory and occurred solely on the basis of the Government's obligations to ensure justice.

The two reports make grim reading for anyone with even an ounce of humanity. Both Lord Justice and Lady Gibson were cruelly killed in a carefully planned and executed bombing attack on the morning of 25 April 1987. The south Armagh brigade of the Provisional IRA claimed responsibility for the killings. The IRA also issued other public statements indicating that the murders had been planned in advance. Suggestions of collusion related to claims that a member or members of the Garda advised those directly responsible for the killings or members of their organisation of the Gibsons' itinerary on that fateful day.

Judge Cory concluded in his report on this appalling crime that there is no evidence of collusion by the Garda or other Government agency that would warrant the holding of an inquiry. I welcome this finding in that it removes doubt or suspicion that a member or members of the Garda committed a gross act of treachery in colluding in the murder of two innocents. I fully realise that is cold comfort to the victims' families.

The other case relevant to this jurisdiction examined by Judge Cory is different, but it involved an equally horrific act of callous murder. While I appreciate that the detail I am about to relate concerning this appalling act of savagery is distressing, it is worth recalling, if only to demonstrate the sheer depravity of those who perpetrated it. On the afternoon of 20 March 1989, Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Bob Buchanan were shot dead in an ambush just north of the Border as they returned from a prearranged meeting with a senior Garda officer in Dundalk Garda station. The Provisional IRA subsequently claimed responsibility for this double murder. The location of the ambush, on the Edenappa road, was found by Judge Cory to have been well chosen in terms of topography and tree cover with respect to a nearby British army observation post. The ambush involved PIRA members establishing a checkpoint on the road only minutes before the arrival of Superintendent Buchanan's private car carrying the two RUC officers. The two officers were unarmed, as was required at the time, and the perpetrators of this act knew that.

From the available information, it appears that two armed men, dressed in army style fatigues and with camouflage on their faces, stopped southbound cars and strategically placed them so as to funnel northbound traffic into a single lane. Shortly after the last southbound vehicle was stopped and in place, Superintendent Buchanan's car appeared, driving northwards. It was also flagged down by the armed men in the middle of the road. As the car slowed, a van, which had been following, overtook Superintendent Buchanan's car and pulled into a nearby laneway. Four armed men, wearing camouflage and balaclavas, emerged from the van and started firing immediately. Superintendent Buchanan attempted to reverse his car to escape but the car apparently stalled and he was unsuccessful.

Both Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Bob Buchanan, while still in the car, were hit several times by a hail of bullets. Examination of the vehicle the following day indicated no less than 25 strike marks from bullets along both sides of the car, with the majority aimed at the driver's side. The autopsy performed on Superintendent Buchanan revealed that he had suffered many fragment wounds in the head and upper body, and it is probable that he was dead by the time his car came to a halt. He had also been shot in the head at close range, almost certainly after he had died.

Chief Superintendent Breen had been wounded in the abdomen, the upper right shoulder and the arm, and had sustained wounds to his head. It appears he had left the car after it came to a stop, waving a white handkerchief. It was obvious he had suffered several gunshot wounds before he left the car which, although severe, did not appear to have been fatal. Eyewitness accounts indicated that a member of the Provisional IRA murder squad walked up to him and shot him in the back of the head. It is worth restating that these were two unarmed RUC officers returning from a meeting with their colleagues in an Garda Síochána. They were, in short, two policemen doing their duty and attempting to achieve peace on both sides of the Border.

That, then, is the appalling scene which Judge Cory paints of the last moments of these two men's lives. As he says himself in his report, those shootings were brutal, cowardly and demonstrated a callous insensitivity to both the suffering of individuals and to life itself. Nobody who could describe himself or herself as interested in peace in Ireland, a united Ireland, justice, human rights or any value asserted in the Proclamation of 1916 could have done that to two unarmed policemen in such a cruel and cowardly way. It is a great shame that the Provisional IRA should do such a thing to two men in those circumstances.

I now turn to suggestions of collusion. Those relate to claims that a member of the Garda Síochána, or a civilian employed within the Garda, advised either those directly responsible for the killings or members of their organisation of the visit of the two RUC officers and, in particular, of the time they left Dundalk Garda station. In his report, Judge Cory examined the known circumstances, the intelligence reports and other matters in drawing conclusions about the case. From a review of the relevant factors, Judge Cory stated that it might be said that the Provisional IRA did not need any assistance from within the Garda to carry out the ambush. Moreover, Judge Cory suggests that the intelligence reports received shortly after the murders, considered by themselves, might be thought to point to a similar conclusion.

However, Judge Cory considered that a statement made by one Kevin Fulton could be found to constitute evidence of collusion on the part of a Garda officer, referred to as Garda B in the report. Kevin Fulton is the pseudonym of a former agent with a British intelligence agency who, in that capacity, is supposed to have become a member of the Provisional IRA. In a statement delivered to Judge Cory, Kevin Fulton claims that, on the day of the ambush of the two RUC officers, his senior IRA commander was told by another member of the IRA that Garda B had informed the Provisional IRA that the two officers were at Dundalk Garda station.

Judge Cory goes on to state that this statement would add credence to two intelligence reports which spoke of a Garda leak. In all this, it should be noted that Judge Cory does not make findings of fact. Rather, he states that if that evidence were accepted by those eventually making the findings of fact, it could be found to constitute collusion. Accordingly, on that basis, Judge Cory concluded that there must be a public inquiry in this case.

As part of the Weston Park agreement, the two Governments committed themselves that, in the event that a public inquiry is recommended in any case, the relevant Government will implement that recommendation. Accordingly, the Government is committed to holding a public inquiry in respect of allegations of Garda collusion in the killings of the two RUC officers. In the light of Judge Cory's recommendations, I secured Government approval to hold a public inquiry into the murders, to take the form of a tribunal of inquiry pursuant to the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts 1921 to 2002. I sought that type of public inquiry because it meets all the essential criteria set down by Judge Cory for a public inquiry. I subsequently secured the authorisation of Government to lay the necessary resolutions before both Houses of the Oireachtas to enable the establishment of the tribunal of inquiry, according to the formulation contained in the motion before the House, which constitutes the tribunal's terms of reference.

I briefly draw the House's attention to some of the more important aspects of the terms of reference. After a straightforward recitation, the main operative section is, of course, that a tribunal shall be established to inquire into suggestions that members of the Garda Síochána or other employees of the State colluded in the fatal shootings of RUC Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and RUC Superintendent Robert Buchanan on 20 March 1989. By any stretch of the imagination, this is the broadest possible interpretation of the findings of the relevant Cory report, and it delimits in no way whatsoever the tribunal's latitude to inquire into whatever organisations and individuals that it sees fit.

The other notable feature of the terms of reference is paragraph (II), which states that if the tribunal finds that there is insufficient co-operation from any person not compellable to give evidence, that fact should be reported to the Clerk of the Dáil for consideration by the Houses of the Oireachtas, in conjunction with myself, having regard to the public interest. The thinking here is simple: it is a fact that likely key witnesses reside outside the jurisdiction. As with domestic legislation in general, the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts 1921 to 2002 apply only within this jurisdiction. Hence, the statutory provisions relating to compellability to give evidence would not apply to likely key witnesses. Accordingly, it is anticipated that the tribunal of inquiry would be obliged to rely on the goodwill and co-operation of non-compellable persons to make progress with aspects of its work. Paragraph (II) of the terms of reference provides a mechanism by which the tribunal can report back to the Houses of the Oireachtas, should non-compellable persons decline to co-operate with the tribunal.

That is an important element of the terms of reference of the tribunal. In the normal course of events, if co-operation from outside the jurisdiction necessary for the tribunal to complete its work were not forthcoming, we would be left with the prospect of the tribunal reporting in an incomplete way. By virtue of this provision, however, the tribunal can report that fact to the Oireachtas. By that means, the problem of securing co-operation from non-compellable persons can be elevated to the political sphere, where I, the Government and the Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas can determine the best way forward. In particular, it provides an opportunity for formal approaches to be made to the British Government, should the need arise, to seek to secure the co-operation of persons residing in either Britain or Northern Ireland, whether they be British citizens or otherwise. It provides a form of political leverage, grounded in the restated will of the Oireachtas, that can be used, should the need arise, to ensure the tribunal is given every opportunity to secure the cooperation of all those who might be able to shed light on this appalling act of barbarism.

The House will be aware that the sole member of the tribunal will be appointed by the Government, and I hope to be able to announce that person's identity later today. I know this House will join with me in advising everyone involved to co-operate fully with the tribunal. I have full confidence that the Garda Síochána, as well as any other institution of the State, will be forthcoming in its engagement with the tribunal. Nothing less than full co-operation is demanded, and nothing less should be expected from the guardians of the State.

There is, however, one organisation that could provide full answers to the tribunal, and that, of course, is the IRA. I challenge that organisation, and Sinn Féin in the House, to state clearly that there will be co-operation with the tribunal. Sinn Féin and the IRA cannot have it both ways: they cannot clamour for justice and truth regarding other barbaric acts that Judge Cory has reported on and in respect of which he has recommended tribunals and not co-operate on this one. Judge Cory's recommendations are not an À la carte menu from which one may choose at will. If those who describe themselves as the republican movement have any intention of demanding full co-operation and delivery on Judge Cory's recommendations by the British Government in so far as it lies within its remit in respect of institutions and persons in Northern Ireland in respect of those other inquiries, they must be willing to deliver to this inquiry a full and complete answer regarding whether this act involved collusion on the part of a member of the Garda Síochána. I say that conscious of the fact that testimony given to a tribunal by definition cannot be used in criminal proceedings against a person who so testifies. Persons who testify to the tribunal which I propose should be established will be in the unique position that they will be able to give the tribunal evidence on a very serious crime knowing that their testimony cannot be used to incriminate them.

This tribunal is being established by the will of the people assembled here in the Houses of the Oireachtas and on foot of an all-party understanding at Weston Park. I ask those in particular who describe themselves as the republican movement to remember that fact because it is the will of the people that savage acts such as the brutal murders of Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Bob Buchanan by the Provisional IRA in 1989 should have no place in this Republic.

Pursuant to the Weston Park agreement the State is under an obligation to establish a public inquiry into the brutal murders of these two RUC officers. We do so not just out of an obligation imposed morally upon us by Judge Cory's report but out of a genuine desire to see justice done. If there was collusion by officers or an officer of the Garda Síochána in this crime, the least the relatives of those two members of the RUC are entitled to is to have that fact established, just as much as the victims of other alleged acts of collusion are entitled to have justice and the truth established in their cases.

I must tell the House that I considered going down the road of a commission of inquiry but I found it did not match up to the criteria laid down by Judge Cory. The form of public inquiry proposed and its proposed terms of reference constitute the most open, potentially expansive and powerful form of public inquiry available under our law here or anywhere else to ensure that the full truth emerges. We owe it to the families of the late Chief Superintendent Breen and Superintendent Buchanan, the people of Northern Ireland and the people of this State, given the concerns raised about organs of this State. I commend the motion to the House.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.