Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A FORMER POLICE chief has condemned proposals to ban prosecutions for people involved in Troubles-related incidents as anger over the Government’s controversial plans continues to grow.
Jon Boutcher, the former chief constable of Bedfordshire who heads Operation Kenova, which is investigating a number of unsolved murders in Northern Ireland, said the proposals did not “sit comfortably” with him.
It comes as the SDLP is seeking to recall the Northern Ireland Assembly from its summer recess to challenge the Government over the row, and a Stormont minister said her party would have to consider if it could take up a ministerial portfolio in the future.
Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis said yesterday that he intends to introduce a proposed statute of limitations which would end all prosecutions for incidents up to April 1998 and would apply to military veterans as well as ex-paramilitaries.
The proposals, which Prime Minister Boris Johnson said would allow Northern Ireland to “draw a line under the Troubles”, would also end all legacy inquests and civil actions related to the conflict.
But the proposals have been widely criticised by all the political parties in Northern Ireland, victims’ groups, the Irish Government and church leaders.
Boutcher said: “The rule of law has stood us incredibly well.
“To take away the hope, the prospect, the potential of justice for these families, and these are some of the most heinous crimes committed in the United Kingdom in modern history, certainly doesn’t sit with me comfortably.
“I read the paper last night as many families will have done and my phone rang off from families who were in tears.
“These families have been let down, given unfulfilled promises and endured countless setbacks, but always conduct themselves with the greatest of dignity and humility.”
SDLP deputy leader Nichola Mallon has tabled a motion to recall Stormont to debate the Government plans.
The motion needs 30 signatures for the Assembly to be recalled.
She said: “To shut down justice and close off avenues for truth and reconciliation by providing an amnesty to state agents and paramilitaries involved in the most serious Troubles-related crimes, including murder, is absolutely abhorrent.
“These proposals are hostile to the interests of victims and survivors, they are opposed by all Executive parties and the British Government must withdraw them now.
“The SDLP has tabled a motion to recall the Assembly from its summer recess to address this matter and send a clear message to the British Government that we will not consent to this course of action.”
A Sinn Féin spokesperson has confirmed the party is backing the recall and will be signing the petition.
Taoiseach Micheál Martin said to the Dáil yesterday: “The introduction of what amounts to a general amnesty for all security personnel, and all paramilitaries, for murders and other crimes, up until the Good Friday Agreement is not the right way to go.
“It’s wrong for many, many reasons. I’ve stated that consistently.”
“That process has now started, as you know. The British Government may be setting out its position,” he also said. “But our position as an Irish Government, shared with all of the political parties in the North and all of the victim groups, remain consistent with that of Stormont House.”
Alliance Party leader and Justice Minister Naomi Long said on Twitter that she has added her name to the petition and her party colleagues will do the same.
Long said she expected the Government plans to be challenged in the courts.
She also said her party may not take the Justice portfolio in the future if the proposals were adopted.
She told the BBC: “We would have to reflect very carefully, if the system is to become so corrupted that people are to be denied justice, as to whether that’s a system over which any member of our party would wish to preside in future.”
Northern Ireland’s political party leaders will meet Lewis on Friday to set out their opposition to the UK Government’s plans.
DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson said a process had to be agreed which would allow victims to pursue justice.
He told the BBC’s Nolan Show: “We have made our position clear to the Government, we want to agree a process that enables those victims and families that want to pursue justice to be able to do so, and I think it is wrong to deny them the opportunity of pursuing justice.
“We are, all the party leaders, meeting with the Secretary of State on Friday, so that will be an opportunity to make our views known.
“We cannot continue to fail victims, we cannot corrupt the rule of law.
“When you proceed on the basis that victims no longer have the opportunity to pursue justice, that is how they will regard this.”
Church leaders have also condemned the Government plans, with the head of the Catholic Church in Ireland saying they will be seen by many victims as a “betrayal of trust”.
Archbishop Eamon Martin said: “It is disturbing that victims and survivors, those have paid the highest price for the fragile peace we all enjoy today, once more feel marginalised and neglected.
“I was particularly disappointed by Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s naive comments in the House of Commons suggesting that his legacy proposals would allow Northern Ireland to ‘draw a line under the Troubles’.
“Dealing with the legacy of our shared past is not an easy task.
“It is a complex undertaking which belongs to all of us.
“It has no quick fix.
“No line can be drawn to relieve the deep hurt still carried in the aftermath of years of violence, death and life-changing injury.”
The Church of Ireland Primate of All Ireland Rev John McDowell added: “The announcement yesterday will have created further heartbreak, frustration and anger for victims of the Troubles.
“The degree of suffering endured by victims over the years is not something that can be moved on from.
“It needs to be acknowledged in the full variety of its expression, and dealt with over the long term.
“Regardless of the name it goes under, a general amnesty is what the Government of the United Kingdom is now planning to put in place.”
With additional reporting from Niamh Quinlan.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
No surprise there then. Party of sham
@Kevin Conway: u think it only happens there
Can anyone think at this stage that ANY govt has its peoples wellfare at heart … a resounding NO. All rotten to the core.
@Lydia McLoughlin: wow wow hold yer horses there lydia. Yep u right
@Lydia McLoughlin: critical thought would tell me that if the Democrats are the ones that brought the bill forward, well then they have the publics and interest at heart.
@Lydia McLoughlin: at least Biden is making some sort of attempt to fix it.
@Kevin Conway: I dunno. The pessimist in me always thinks it’s all a front. Promise this, promise that but its only half hearted or it turns out it can’t be done anyway .. our lot are masters at it! Only those consulted benefit by producing report after report to come back and report it can’t be done!
Yes Minister springs to mind!
I just find it interesting this article did not say the reason the Republicans voted against it. Yes we heard why the Democrats think they voted against it but not their own response. Usually when Republicans vote against something that seems to make sense they have a reason that isnt as nonsensical as this article suggests. Im not saying I agree with them I’m just saying this is biased.
@Sean Casey: Yes, it does make sense. They want the dark money since it benefits them more than the Democrats.
@Peter Peterski: Why wasnt Mitch McConnells reasoning covered in the article?
@Peter Peterski: even though the article says the democrats benefited substantially more $1.5 million compared to $900k
@Anthony Mcgee: 1.5 BILLION versus 900 million. Just a tiny bit more.
Unfortunately In the end you get “the best government money can buy”.
Both sides are guilty but it would seem the Democrat party is at least willing to change the rules.
The amount of money (that doesn’t have to be declared where it comes from) that’s spent by on political advertising is phenomenal.
Less than 7 weeks to go until the midterms, in the US you can’t watch TV or watch anything online without being bombarded constantly by political attack ads.
This election cycle I’ve noticed that “radical” seems to be the buzzword. The 2 candidates for senate and the 2 candidates for governor in my state are running ads where they both just accuse and call each other “too radical for Wisconsin”
Political donations are corruption, plain and simple
Breaking news! facts in an article completely contradict the headline…
The irony of the democratic party bemoaning nefarious uses of political funding in American elections, while they themselves are funding extreme far right candidates in the US primaries to both make the Republican party look as far right as possible by association and also because they believe they can motivate undecided voters to vote for the democratic party candidates if the perceived alternative candidate is a far right looney that they themselves promoted into the political spotlight..
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/
Just to add, the amount of money spent by the Democratic party funding far right candidates in the current US primaries, is an eye watering $50 million to date.
@David Van-Standen: they want the ‘radical’ Republican candidate to win the Republican primary because they reckon the mad radical Republican candidate will lose to the Democrat candidate in the actual election in November. They are funding the weakest Republican in the primary so they beat them in the election.
It’s not for ideological reasons it’s so they can beat them in the actual election.
The Republicans did the same, backing Bernie Sanders to win against Hillary in the Democratic primaries.
It’s inherently risky, the mad radical they think will lose can end up winning sometimes.
After all, Hillary Clinton lost to Trump in 2016.
@Diaspora’d: thanks, that’s what i said.
I never claimed it was ideologically motivated, just a nefarious use of funding, in an attempt to rig the ultimate outcome in favour of the democratic party, while also slinging muck at the Republican party.
I just cannot figure how the Irish Government hrre have been able to afford Brexit, Covid, and, now the cost of living crisis it seems is going to bring a give away budget! Who is bank-rolling them? and Why?
Remember they announced a surplus of €6.3bn recently!
@Caoimhghin Whyte: the EU massively supported the Covid measures.
The benefits of being in the bloc are there to be seen.
Republicans cannot stand against corruption and still support Trump. They don’t want to live in denial. Might as well defend corrupt money and don’t be called hypocrite later
Just like ours.
Biden could be on fire and the Republicans wouldn’t urinate on him to put it out. They wouldn’t do that for any democrat and that’s what’s wrong with politics in this day and age, the most basic concepts of civility is dead and gone
Dark money is that given to the Democratic party by the likes of Planned parenthood (who make a profit and promote abortion).
Should cap all donations to say around 50′id say
have your say