An attempt to stop the prosecution of a former British soldier for the murder of a child in Derry 48 years ago has been rejected.The anonymous ‘Soldier B’ had claimed the decision to charge him over the killing of Daniel Hegarty put him at heightened risk of sudden death due to ill health.
Fifteen-year-old Daniel (left) was shot twice in the head during an British Army operation in Creggan in July 1972.
In April 2019, it was announced that ‘Soldier B’ was to be charged with his murder, and of intentionally wounding Daniel’s cousin Christopher Hegarty, then aged 17, in the same incident.
The shootings happened during Operation Motorman, when British troops were deployed in Derry at the height of the conflict to impose British rule in liberated areas.
In 2011, an inquest jury unanimously found Daniel posed no risk and had been shot without warning.
A decision was taken not to prosecute Soldier B in 2016. But, in May 2018, the High Court quashed that determination following legal action by the Hegarty family.
Bloody Sunday campaigner John Kelly said the attempt to evade prosecution was “sickening” and said he looked forward to seeing justice for the Hegarty family.
DEATH OF HUGH JORDAN
Meanwhile, tributes have been paid following the death of Hugh Jordan (right), father of shoot-to-kill victim Pearse Jordan, who was shot dead by the RUC in 1992.
For the last 28 years the Jordan family have been tireless campaigners for the truth of what happened.
West Belfast MP Paul Maskey said that “like so many relatives seeking truth, Hugh has passed away without answers about his son’s death because of continuing attempts by the British government to block access to the truth about its role in the conflict.
“My thoughts and condolences are with Theresa and the Jordan family at this difficult time and we will continue to support them in their campaign for truth.”
Mark Thompson from victims’ group Relatives For Justice (RFJ) said Hugh Jordan spent “every single day” from the shooting of Pearse challenging the RUC and their version of events.
“He knew Pearse was unarmed and he knew that the RUC lied about killing him,” he said. “He brought that challenge from Belfast to Europe. Despite many setbacks he never faltered. He always believed the truth would out.
“Despite continual and vicious harassment by the RUC after Pearse’s death he and his wife Theresa never gave up. They had that inner strength that said they were right.”
Mr Thompson said that Hugh and Theresa were the backbone of social activities from the day RFJ opened its Falls Road office in 1999.
“Our hearts are heavy and sore. We can only express our heartfelt sympathy to Theresa agus clan. This has been a cruel year. And never was it ever truer said of anyone – ní bheidh a leithéid ann arís.”
The DUP refused to believe warnings that Boris Johnson was planning to betray them and instead cosied up to English nationalists
While claiming failure is in fact success provokes derision, leaders appreciate that admitting mistakes reveals their judgement to have been flawed – and they know that in the tribal world of politics their most vociferous supporters will back them almost regardless of their actions.
And so, the default for most politicians is to defend the indefensible until, or often past, the point where that becomes preposterous.
In multiple interviews this week by senior DUP figures there was not a scintilla of regret, not an ounce of self-reflection. From a party which once boasted of its unprecedented power over the government, where there might have been humility, there was pride; in place of embarrassment, there was chutzpah.
The confirmation this week that the Irish Sea Border will start in just 20 days extinguished any lingering hope from those who believed that a year ago Boris Johnson somehow stumbled into signing an agreement which he misunderstood, rather than having betrayed the DUP in a ruthlessly calculated fashion.Read MoreSam McBride: Farcically, Boris Johnson’s government is denying there will be an …
While the UK-EU deal this week reduces that border’s burden, and a possible trade deal would further soften the new border, the fact remains that it is nonetheless a new internal UK trade frontier.
Northern Ireland is still a part of the United Kingdom and in a constitutional sense the Union endures. But what Brexit has wrought raises the question of what defines a country. Article VI of the Act of Union more than three centuries ago put in place a trade union alongside political union, stating that the King’s subjects in Ireland and Great Britain were to “be entitled to the same privileges, and be on the same footing…in all ports and places in the united kingdom and its dependencies”.https://5ad69703e70ab7386f66a3e1fff46e0d.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html
Internal free trade is one of the defining characteristics of a country, yet here it will be constrained. A situation looms in which, as things stand, it will be unlawful for some British food to be sold in Northern Ireland.
While Parliament and the Crown are nominally still sovereign in Northern Ireland, the de facto position is very different. What is sovereignty if another country – or in this case 27 other countries – can rewrite the laws by which we are bound?
The fact that EU officials will be in Larne and Belfast to enforce the border, as agreed this week, is only a visual manifestation of an unspinnable reality – even without their presence, it would be EU rules over which we will have no democratic say which would be enforced on the EU’s behalf.
Having backed Brexit as something which would lead to a land of milk and honey, the DUP is now reduced not to selling the gains of leaving the EU but attempting to argue that it has helped to mitigate some of the most damaging possibilities.
Senior DUP figures must bitterly regret having not only backed Brexit, but having done so with such zeal that it accepted the then greatest political donation in the history of Northern Irish politics so that it could campaign for Brexit in Great Britain, and then aligned themselves with an ERG suffused with English nationalism.
On Thursday an audibly frustrated Nigel Dodds – who sat on the board of Vote Leave – used an interview with Good Morning Ulster to insist that in backing Brexit “our political strategy has not failed” and criticise the BBC’s questions.
Yet if Lord Dodds had heeded what the BBC was accurately reporting just over a year ago, he may have been able to avoid a move which made it easier for Mr Johnson to get the deal which creates the new border. Last September, Newsnight reported that Mr Johnson was planning for Northern Ireland to be treated very differently to the rest of the UK. But Lord Dodds told Newsnight that he was “quite relaxed about the way things are going” and “I think Boris Johnson knows what he is about” – even though Mr Johnson had openly betrayed the DUP just months earlier.
Two weeks after Newsnight’s revelation, Mr Johnson published his proposed deal for an Irish Sea regulatory border. It spelt out that agri-food goods crossing the Irish Sea from GB would have to go through a “Border Inspection Post…as required by EU law” and “be subject to identity and documentary checks and physical examination”. Similar arrangements would apply to goods due to the province aligning with “all relevant EU rules” in that area.
Given Arlene Foster’s repeated insistence that an Irish Sea border was her “blood red line”, to the surprise of many observers she immediately welcomed the development, saying that “we believe it’s something that works for Northern Ireland”.
What really went on inside the DUP at that point has never been publicly revealed, but it appears that the party believed it was being clever. Mr Johnson’s proposal involved a Stormont vote on the arrangements and the DUP knew – as did the PM – that it had a Stormont veto. But even that logic seemed reckless at the time because devolution was not functioning and it seemed inconceivable that Sinn Féin, which had its own veto on restoring devolution, would have agreed to do so if the DUP was to immediately use that to crush the deal with the EU.
Within three weeks, Mr Johnson had struck his withdrawal deal with the EU and betrayed the DUP. The deal effectively removed the DUP’s veto, instead putting in place a simple majority vote in the Assembly.
In the days after that whirlwind of U-turn and betrayal, Theresa May’s former special adviser on Europe, Raoul Ruparel, told MPs that the DUP support for Mr Johnson’s offer to the EU was “a significant change” from their past opposition to any regulatory divergence and something which crucially “gave the government more leeway to negotiate”. He said that “maybe wasn’t the right choice for them [the DUP]”.https://5ad69703e70ab7386f66a3e1fff46e0d.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html
Myriad dangers for unionism, many of them still unknown, stem from how Brexit has unfolded.
If, as now seems likely, the UK decides to maintain EU standards in order to soften the new border, that has the potential to anger Brexiteers and others with an interest in altering those standards. Wasn’t Brexit about taking back control, after all?
If Northern Ireland, rather than Brussels, is now the impediment to that control being exercised, the anger once directed at continental bureaucrats could be channelled towards Northern Ireland.
On Wednesday, a fence-sitting DUP statement said: “We will want to ensure that regardless of wider circumstances there continues to be full-unfettered access for our businesses to the lucrative GB marketplace.” Yet participating in a market involves trade in two directions. Even the supposedly “unfettered” ability for Northern Ireland firms to sell to GB is more complex than it first appears.https://5ad69703e70ab7386f66a3e1fff46e0d.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html
This week a senior freight industry figure explained how local manufacturers benefit significantly from lorries coming into Northern Ireland with goods from GB, because they are returning anyway. Disrupting one route necessarily disturbs the other.
Borders are complex but in Northern Ireland it might have been expected that politicians would have an intuitive understanding of their significance.
Instead, eight months after the vote for Brexit the then DUP MLA Nelson McCausland told the Nolan Show during a discussion about border arrangements: “I wouldn’t care what sort of situation I face as long as I’m out of Europe.”
That glib comment summed up the constitutional flippancy of some senior DUP figures who were wallowing in simplistic nationalistic fervour, while ignorant of the complexity of the changes they were proposing and the fragility of the Union with which they were tampering.https://5ad69703e70ab7386f66a3e1fff46e0d.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html
The DUP now likes to point to the absurdity of Mr Johnson’s position but its own refusal to accept its multiple mistakes is as unconvincing as the prime minister’s denial that there will even be an Irish Sea Border.
BREXIT may not produce the free trade agreement with the US many euroskeptics hoped for as the Irish lobby in Washington pressures Joe Biden to come down hard on Boris Johnson.
By Charlie Bradley, Express. London. Thursday, December 10, 2020
Joe Biden’s election victory in November will undoubtedly change the landscape of world politics as he replaces outgoing President Donald Trump. As Brexit trade talks reach a tense conclusion, it appears even UK-EU negotiations will also be shaped by the result across the Atlantic. The President-elect has long been vocal about his strong connection to Ireland, a country where his ancestors originated. The Democrat piled pressure on Prime Minister Boris Johnson during Brexit talks after he tried to modify his withdrawal agreement with the EU.But Mr. Johnson’s Internal Market Bill sparked anger in Washington, with Mr. Biden warning that the Good Friday Agreement must not be a “casualty of Brexit”.However, the Prime Minister also angered one of the US Congress’ most influential lobby groups – the Friends of Ireland – leaving the UK’s hopes of a US trade deal post-Brexit in disarray.Congressman Richard Neal, chair of the powerful Ways and Means Committee and member of the Friends of Ireland caucus, released a statement in September condemning Mr. Johnson’s efforts to change the protocol.He said: “Earlier this year, the European Union and the United Kingdom approved a withdrawal agreement that established the terms of the United Kingdom’s orderly exit from the EU. “I urge both sides to uphold the terms of this joint agreement, particularly with respect to the treatment of Northern Ireland, in accordance with international law. “The UK’s departure from the EU at the end of this year and any US-UK trade agreement must preserve the Good Friday Agreement, which has maintained peace and prosperity for British and European peoples since 1998.”Every political party on the island opposes a return of a hard border. I sincerely hope the British government upholds the rule of law and delivers on the commitments it made during Brexit negotiations, particularly in regard to the Irish border protocols.” The group was reported to have as many as 54 members by The Guardian in 2019, outlining the key influence it could have over a US-UK free trade agreement. The Irish National Caucus website still lists 36 senators and representatives who were infuriated by Mr. Johnson’s Internal Market Bill.It would appear, however, that the UK Government has realized the potential damage changes to the Northern Ireland protocol could have. This week, Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove announced plans to ditch some of the controversial clauses in the Internal Market Bill while looking for a last-minute deal with the EU. He added that he was “delighted” to have reached an agreement, including on post-Brexit arrangements for the Irish border, following talks with European Commission Vice President Maros Sefcovic. While this will be a step in the right direction as far as Washington is concerned, a former UK ambassador to the US warned there could still be ill-feeling between Mr. Johnson and Mr. Biden. Sir Kim Darroch, made the claim in October, saying that Mr Johnson’s comments about Barack Obama in 2016 have had a lasting impact.Mr. Johnson accused Mr. Obama of having an “ancestral dislike of the British Empire”, referring to his “part-Kenyan” ancestry.The comments were branded “idiotic” and “deeply offensive”. Sir Kim Darroch said: “I hesitate to say this, but there will be some Obama people in a Biden administration and they remember some of the things that the current Prime Minister said about Obama whether as a newspaper columnist or whether it was Mayor of London. “I promise you there is still some resentment and unhappiness over that. I’m not sure there will be, you know, quite the warm, welcoming embrace from Mr. Biden as it would from Mr. Trump.”
Supporters of President Trump in Lansing, Mich., on Tuesday.Emily Elconin/Reuters
Falsehoods and threats
President Trump’s attempts to overturn the election result are very unlikely to succeed. For that reason, the effort can sometimes seem like a publicity stunt — an effort by Trump to raise money and burnish his image with his supporters.
And it may well be all of those things. But it is also a remarkable campaign against American democracy. It has grown to include most Republican-run states, most Republican members of Congress and numerous threats of violence. I want to use today’s newsletter to explain it.
The new centerpiece in the effort is a lawsuit that the state of Texas filed this week with the Supreme Court and that Trump supports. It claims that the election in four swing states — Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — suffered from “unconstitutional irregularities.”
The suit is based on the same lies that Trump has been telling about voter fraud. In reality, there was no meaningful fraud, as local officials from both parties have concluded. William Barr, Trump’s attorney general, came to the same conclusion.
Nonetheless, the attorneys general of 17 states — including Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Indiana, Utah, Arizona and the Dakotas — have backed the Texas lawsuit. Yesterday, more than half of House Republicans released a legal brief supporting it. “If they get their way in court (they won’t), they would break the country,” David French of The Dispatch, a conservative publication, wrote.
They are doing so, as my colleagues Jeremy Peters and Maggie Haberman have explained, largely because they believe that defying Trump would damage their standing with Republican voters. By doing so, the politicians are “inflaming the public,” French noted, causing many voters to believe — wrongly — that a presidential election was unfair. And that belief is fueling an outbreak of violent threats against elections officials, including:
Dozens of Trump supporters, some armed, went to the home of Jocelyn Benson, Michigan’s Democratic secretary of state, and began shouting obscenities.On Twitter, Trump supporters have posted photographs of the home of Ann Jacobs, a Wisconsin official, and mentioned her children.In Phoenix, about 100 Trump supporters, some armed, protested at the building where officials were counting votes.In Vermont, officials received a voice message threatening them with “execution by firing squad.”Seth Bluestein, a Philadelphia official, received anti-Semitic and violent threats after Pam Bondi, a Trump ally, publicly mentioned him.A Georgia poll worker went into hiding after a viral video falsely claimed he had discarded ballots.Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s Republican secretary of state, and his wife have received death threats, including by text message, and caravans have circled their house.Gabriel Sterling, another Georgia official, received a message wishing him a happy birthday and saying it would be his last.
In a later interview with Time magazine, Sterling argued that elected politicians could defuse the threats by acknowledging that the election was fair. “Leadership is supposed to look like grown-ups in the room saying, ‘I know you’re upset, but this is the reality,’” Sterling said.
A swing state responds: In a Supreme Court filing, Pennsylvania called the Texas lawsuit part of a “cacophony of bogus claims,” a “seditious abuse of the judicial process” and “an affront to principles of constitutional democracy.”
In a letter to the UK Ambassador to the United States, Dame Karen Pierce, and copied to all members of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate, the Ancient Order of Hibernians have expressed their outrage at the decision by the British government not to pursue an open inquiry into the assassination of civil rights lawyer Pat Finucane – this despite the admission by the UK of “shocking levels of collusion” by government entities.
The letter states: “We write to you, Ambassador Pierce, as members of the National Board of the Ancient Order of Hibernians, the largest Irish American organization in the United States, to express our indignation at the decision not to pursue an open inquiry into the assassination of civil rights lawyer Pat Finucane.
We find it an oxymoron that Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis can both apologize for the murder of Mr. Finucane and reiterate the admission of ‘shocking levels of collusion’ by UK government entities while simultaneously ignoring international appeals, including a letter signed by 24 members of the U.S. Congress, for a full and open inquiry.
“We find Secretary Lewis’ claim that the decision not to pursue an open inquiry is due to concerns of interfering with investigations by the Ombudsman and the PSNI disingenuous to the point of insulting the world’s intelligence. The Ombudsman has publicly stated they have no plans regarding the Finucane case, and PSNI Chief Constable Simon Byrne has said that there are ‘currently no new lines of inquiry.’ We can only conclude that either Secretary Lewis is completely disconnected from Northern Ireland reality or completely duplicitous.
“We note the stark contrast between the decision not to pursue an inquiry into the Finucane case and the British government’s reaction to the attempted assassination by Russian intelligence agents of former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia.
“We specifically note the comments made by Jeremy Fleming, Director of Britain’s intelligence organization GCHQ, that ‘[Russia is] not playing to the same rules, they’re blurring the boundaries between criminal and state activity.’
“We find the hypocrisy of Britain denouncing Russia for ‘blurring the boundaries between criminal and state activity’ while covering up their own admitted ‘shocking levels of collusion’ in the assassination of a civil rights lawyer, and the wounding of his wife by their own security forces, to be unprecedented.
“Since after three decades, and despite numerous commitments under internationally recognized treaty, the UK continues to ignore its responsibilities to the Finucanes and the other victims of ‘the Troubles,’ the members of the Ancient Order of Hibernians are committed to working with members of the U.S. Congress and Senate to hold the UK accountable.
“The Hibernians remember the words of Dr. Martin Luther King that ‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.’”
The letter to Ambassador Pierce is signed by AOH National President Daniel J. O’Connell, Political Action Chair Neil F. Cosgrove, and Freedom for All Ireland Chair Martin Galvin.
Supporters of President Trump in Lansing, Mich., on Tuesday.Emily Elconin/Reuters