Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)

I have been asked by the Tánaiste to deal with the issue of the Boston College archive, as raised by Deputy Martin.

Let me set out the background to the case. In March 2011, the British Government, acting on behalf of the Police Service of Northern Ireland, PSNI, initiated proceedings with the US Department of Justice under the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty between the two countries. These legal proceedings led to a subpoenaing of a collection of archived interviews being held in Boston College. The archives are part of the Belfast Project, involving an oral history of republican and loyalist paramilitaries deposited in the Burns Library at the college.

The initial subpoena related to the interviews of Ms Dolours Price and Mr. Brendan Hughes, two former members of the Provisional IRA. A second subpoena was issued seeking "any and all interviews containing information about the abduction and death of Ms Jean McConville", one of the disappeared victims of the Provisional IRA.

Two legal challenges were launched by Boston College and separately by Mr. Mclntyre and Mr. Moloney to quash the subpoenas. Mr. Mclntyre and Mr. Moloney argued that the British Government had made a "solemn promise" that it would not "reopen issues addressed in the Belfast Agreement, or impede any further efforts to resolve the conflict in Northern Ireland". In December 2011, these challenges were dismissed by US District Court judge William Young. Following this review, the judge's order that all relevant materials be handed over to the British Government was delayed following further legal efforts by Mr. Mclntyre and Mr. Moloney. Last Friday, 6 July, the US Federal Court of Appeals for the First Circuit turned down their appeal. As matters stand, this means the archived material must be handed over by Boston College to the US authorities for onward transmission to their British counterparts. However, Mr. Moloney and Mr. Mclntyre are considering a motion for a re-hearing of the case. They also continue to keep their legal options open in the Belfast courts.

Last February, the Tánaiste told the House in reply to a parliamentary question that as the issue of the archive was currently the subject of ongoing legal proceedings before the courts in the United States, it would be inappropriate for the Government to comment on the matter at that time.

On 23 January 2012, Senator John Kerry, chairman of the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations wrote to Secretary of State Clinton to warn of the danger that the subpoena might "upset the delicate balance that has kept the peace" in Northern Ireland and asked that she "work with the British authorities to reconsider the path they have chosen and revoke their request". Other prominent Irish Americans have agreed with Senator Kerry's assessment.

The Deputy will appreciate that a number of factors inform the Government's views on this matter. The issue is subject to a mutual legal assistance treaty between the US and British Governments. As Senator Kerry and others have said, the issue undoubtedly has the potential to make an impact on the peace process. However, in the Government's view, the peace process is sufficiently firmly bedded down to enable it to withstand whatever pressures may emerge from time to time. The issue also has a bearing on how we deal with the past generally. We know the pain and hurt of victims, including that of the McConville family, never cease. We need to find sensitive ways of dealing with the past that meet the needs of victims and the bereaved.

Clearly, the case is a matter that the courts in the United States have spoken on and may do so again, as may the courts in Northern Ireland. Officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, in addition to those of the Department of Justice and Equality, will continue to monitor closely any further developments.

See this speech in context