Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail)

Fáiltím roimh an Aire. I express my appreciation of the work done to bring about the Barron report and the work of the Sub-Committee on the Barron Report. It is evident that the sub-committee was meticulous and sincere in its approach to a very harrowing matter. All of us who observed at first hand the terrible anguish of the relatives of the victims have come to accept that for them there will be no closure at this time. The atrocities, which must rank among the greatest tragedies of the Troubles, must be fully investigated and those responsible brought to justice.

Justice for the Forgotten, which has made a statement available to Senators, recognises the work done by the sub-committee. Some clarity has been brought to this terrible period in the lives of the members of the group and in the life of the State. This is a step in the right direction. This clarity is particularly necessary because one can only imagine the amount of work done by the group in previous decades to ensure that the forgotten would no longer be forgotten. We are now seeing a step towards closure in this regard.

I support the proposal to hold a public tribunal of inquiry within the State. I say this because the atrocities happened within the State itself. This was the preferred option of the sub-committee but it went on to list the difficulties with that course of action given that the perpetrators, witnesses and information are all outside the jurisdiction of the State. I draw a parallel with the International War Crimes Tribunal which deals with perpetrators, information and witnesses from outside the immediate jurisdiction. What is required in such a case is goodwill and co-operation, particularly from states.

As it is now becoming evident that there was collusion by the security forces in the North of Ireland in these atrocities there was, by extension, collusion by the British Government. Collusion does not have to be active involvement in the act itself. It may be prior knowledge that something is to happen or the fact that a structure which would enable it to happen is allowable and acceptable. If one looks at the International War Crimes Tribunal one sees the same logic, legal and otherwise, being applied when states or leaders of states are brought to justice or asked to account for crimes committed in the name of the state or with the collusion of the state or its leadership.

If the families of the victims are requesting a tribunal the first step in setting up such a tribunal should be taken, even though we know there will be difficulties down the road. When we reach those difficulties I propose that we request the British Government to give the same co-operation to an inquiry of this nature, which concerns us so directly as a good neighbour of Britain, as it would give to its demands, involvement and co-operation in international war crimes tribunals. I see no difference. Is Britain prepared to show good neighbourliness, involve itself and interact directly with such a tribunal?

How can that be progressed? We must not be afraid of what is revealed in such a process and not feel that because we are making progress in bringing about normality within the island, it is necessary to be hyper-diplomatic in such a case. That would build progress on a false premise and we would not be living up to our responsibilities to our own citizens who are our immediate concern. We are not just talking about the families of the victims, but about all citizens who want to be sure they enjoy the protection of the State now and in the future. We must be prepared to take that stand irrespective of what is revealed.

It is unbelievable that the investigation into such atrocities could be closed down after three months. Nothing can justify even closing it down after three years or 30 years because over and over we have seen other cases being reactivated by the gardaí and other forces.

The Government of the day has not fully absolved itself in this case. I am not talking about individual Ministers but about the Government's responsibility for leadership within the State. That is another case where we must be careful. We are not being critical of any political grouping. We are talking about the corporate State.

It is vital that the external aspect of these events is recognised. We should not be tempted to believe that by demanding that justice be done and a process set in motion to bring about that justice, we would hinder political progress that has already been made. There have been other cases that do not just involve the relationship between Ireland and Britain, but between Britain and other countries.

If we are really to respond in a manner that will give Justice for the Forgotten the confidence that we are acting on behalf of the victims and their families, we must listen to them rather than to doubts or expediencies we might believe we should exercise. Perhaps I am at variance with what has been said here but I reiterate that we should not look at the obstacles down the road to a public tribunal of inquiry to be established under the 1921 Act. We should do what is right and then we should demand of our neighbour, Britain, that it also does right.