Posted by Jim on December 4, 2020
British govt rejects Supreme Court call for Finucane inquiry
Posted by Jim on November 30, 2020
 The British government has again refused to establish a public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane, the 39-year-old defence lawyer shot dead in front of his family in Belfast in 1989 by paramilitaries acting on the direction of the British Armed Forces.The assassination came shortly after a Home Office minister, Douglas Hogg, expressed his concern to the House of Commons about lawyers “unduly sympathetic to the IRA”.In February, the British government had been ordered to hold a proper, independent investigation by the Supreme Court in London. However, Britain’s Direct Ruler in Ireland, Brandon Lewis (left), today revealed at the Westminster parliament that his government intended to effectively defy that ruling.He told the Commons the levels of collusion in the case were “totally unacceptable” and reiterated a previous apology by the former British prime minister, David Cameron. However, despite several court decisions rejecting its independence, he insisted a policing investigation should continue.“It is important that we allow the PSNI and Police Ombudsman processes to move forward, and that we avoid the risk of prejudicing any emerging conclusions from that work,” he said.He also said he believed the London government’s obligations under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights could be met “through a series of processes”, and but without further explanation.Mr Finucane’s widow Geraldine said Mr Lewis’s proposal “falls so far short of what is required in this case that it beggars belief,” adding that it made a “mockery of the decision” regarding a public inquiry by the Supreme Court in London.“It is yet another insult added to a deep and lasting injury,” she said. Mrs Finucane said the family would continue to campaign for a full public inquiry.Mr Finucane’s son John, who is the MP for North Belfast, told reporters in Belfast immediately after the announcement that his family was “angry” and given all that had been established about collusion in his father’s murder, it was “insulting” and “disgraceful” that after more than 30 years that Mr Lewis was still “not ruling out” a public inquiry in the future.The British government previously committed in 2001 to hold a public inquiry into his killing, and again in response to the outcome of the Cory Collusion inquiry in 2004, but after several years delay former British prime minister, David Cameron, finally commissioned a “review” of the murder by British state lawyer Desmond de Silva.In 2012, de Silva reported that agents of the British state were involved in the murder and that it ‘should have been prevented’. However, his report was dismissed by Mr Finucane’s widow Geraldine as “a sham… a whitewash… a confidence trick”.In response to this year’s Supreme Court ruling that a proper independent investigation had indeed never been held, the British government made a commitment that by the end of November it would give a definitive statement as to whether a full inquiry would finally go ahead.But today’s announcement calling for further police investigation instead has baffled legal experts. The PSNI Chief Simon Byrne admitted this evening “there are currently no new lines of inquiry” but that a decision would be made “if a further review is merited”.Minister for Foreign Affairs, Simon Coveney TD, said only the independent public inquiry agreed by Britain under the Weston Park talks deal in 2001 would provide a satisfactory outcome to the case. He said his government was “disappointed” that the opportunity was not taken today to establish such an inquiry.Sinn Féin leader Mary Lou McDonald tweeted that “only a full public inquiry can get to the truth. That’s why successive British governments have refused to establish one.” The following is the full text of a statement issued this evening by the Finucane family. Today the British Government has declined to hold a public inquiry into the murder of my husband, Pat Finucane. Instead, the Secretary of State proposes to leave the case in the hands of the PSNI and the NI Police Ombudsman for further investigation.This proposal falls so far short of what is required in this case that it beggars belief. It makes a mockery of the decision by the UK Supreme Court and the forthright comments of Belfast High Court. It is yet another insult added to a deep and lasting injury.The UK Supreme Court made it clear that none of the previous investigations, including police investigations, had uncovered the identity of British security force members who engaged in collusion or the precise nature of the assistance they gave to paramilitaries. The Court highlighted the absence of compulsive powers in the De Silva Review and its inability to test the truthfulness of witnesses. The Supreme Court made it clear that an effective investigation had not yet taken place.In response to this, the current Secretary of State, Brandon Lewis, proposes that we should engage with the local police as a potential solution. He proposes that we should engage with the local police complaints bureau to address a case that involves proven collusion by the British State in the murder of a solicitor. This is a farcical proposal. The issue before the British Government – as Mr. Lewis and his colleagues in government know only too well – is the involvement of a multitude of British State agencies in the murder of Pat Finucane.There is only one reason to ask the local police to investigate a case that involves the British Army, the Security Services and former members of government: that reason is to ensure they will be untouchable. It is this internalisation of the issue to Northern Ireland that has allowed those responsible for the murder of Pat Finucane to do so with impunity.In failing to establish a public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane, the British Government have not only set themselves against my family but also the Irish government, local, national and international political parties, political institutions, legal and human rights groups domestically and internationally.The murder of Pat Finucane has been described as not just an attack on one lawyer but an attack on the rul e of law itself. The Secretary of State has shown us today that the attack is continuing. They have clearly set themselves against the rule of law in ignoring the highest court of their own jurisdiction. They remain in breach of their international legal obligations, a shameful and inexcusable position for a sovereign government to take.They have again shown that they have no intention in admitting their role in the conflict here. Colluding with killers did not just result in my husband’s murder, but many others. The extent and depth of this political policy is what the British government fear being exposed. The outcome of our meeting today confirms that once again.We are grateful for the enormous support we have received. We will continue to campaign for a full public inquiry. The questions that demand answers around Pat’s murder are not going away and neither is our campaign for truth and justice.” |
Loyalist terror gang issue threats against two Sunday World journalists
Posted by Jim on November 29, 2020
The breakaway South East Antrim UDA (Ulster Defence Association) was being linked to that threat.
By PA Reporter
November 29 2020 07:16 AM
Two journalists have been warned of threats – including a shoot to kill – against them from loyalist paramilitaries, a union has said.
The reporters, working for the Northern Ireland edition of the Sunday World newspaper, were contacted by police and told of the latest threats.
It comes days after it was revealed that a journalist working for the Belfast Telegraph had been threatened by a loyalist paramilitary group.
The breakaway South East Antrim UDA (Ulster Defence Association) was being linked to that threat, following a spate of similar incidents earlier this year.
On the latest reports to emerge on Saturday, Amnesty International said it had been made aware of two separate threats made by the UDA against one of the Sunday World journalists, including a death threat reported to be planned in the coming days.ADVERTISING
Patrick Corrigan, Amnesty’s Northern Ireland programme director, condemned the latest threats and called on Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) to “get a grip” on the problem before someone is killed.
The journalists have been named in various “threatening social media posts” and both have been threatened on previous occasions, the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) said.
One was contacted in the middle of the night by police and alerted to a threat, while the other has been issued with a shoot to kill threat and is also at risk of entrapment and attack, the union said.
Seamus Dooley, NUJ assistant general secretary, said: “Once again NUJ members have received serious threats from loyalist paramilitaries and criminals intent on silencing journalism in Northern Ireland.
“These attempts to intimidate journalists must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.
“We welcome the fact that the journalists concerned have received the full support of their employer. The protection of journalists and the active pursuit of those who threaten the media is essential to a functioning democratic society.
“The PSNI is fully engaged with both journalists and we hope that every effort will be made to ensure the continued safety of our members, their families and their colleagues.”
Mr Corrigan said: “Journalists in Northern Ireland – particularly those investigating illegal paramilitary and criminal activity – are now operating in a climate of fear.
“Chilling threats against journalists are now being made on an almost daily basis.
“Yet, no-one is being arrested, no-one is being held to account. Emboldened by this apparent impunity, those responsible have stepped up their efforts to intimidate the media.
“The police must get a grip on this problem before another journalist loses their life.”
Renewing trust, confidence and motivation to make Northern Ireland a home for all
Posted by Jim on
November 29, 2020, 8:23 am
The meeting took place in Portrush. In addition to local members, it was attended by the recently elected UUP party leader. In the course of a short speech which seemed unrehearsed and lacked emphasis on any key messaging, he said: “Unionism is always at its best when it has something to fight against.” Like ‘United We Stand ‘it maybe works as a rallying cry but, not unusual within unionist groupings, reveals a limiting view of any vision or hope for a preferred future. Stuck between the incompatibility of echoes of a fighting past and ‘Tiocfaidh ár lá’, both chosen to shepherd the community into binary categories, partisan agendas and the pursuit of power, if people in Northern Ireland, robbed of hope amidst the rubble of prejudice and political conflict, want a meaningful future, they will have to become their own leaders and build it themselves.
Many within the pro-union constituency have already chosen to do so; no longer willing to endorse the communal polarisation in which some would seek to tell them they have to live. Intensity and passion being no substitute for problem-solving and political stagnation, their aim is to mould a future for all that is worth having and make change happen better.
Writing in 1998, in an update to his book Rethinking Unionism: An Alternative Vision for Northern Ireland, author Norman Porter articulated the need for ‘unionism to disentangle from sectarianism.’ In referring to cultural, liberal and civic unionism he recognised cultural shifts resulting from globalisation and other influences but notes that ‘it does not fully translate into political openness ‘and rejection of’ absolutist political orthodoxy.’ This is no longer the case. Data confirms a significant shift across all the age percentiles with regard to what people deem important to their lives and health, economy and employment are prioritised above constitutional concerns.
Political unionism is slow to respond and still seeking out sectarian battles to fight; oblivious it seems to the reality that many see unionism as anti-Catholic and uber-Protestant, it continues to use language couched in denominational tones and embrace rituals accordingly. In effect, it is abandoning the more important challenges of, for example, health reform, the regional and low wage failings of the ‘trickle-down economy’, under-developed infrastructure, disability rights and pockets showing high rates of economic inactivity. The prosperity and investment in the Titanic Quarter and elsewhere is a welcome driver for an improving Northern Ireland but levelling up is paramount.
The creativity, energy and desire are there. Individuals who deploy the term civic unionist or pro-Union, particularly, but not only the post- ceasefire and GFA generation, invest their energy and activism into issue-centred politics prioritising social and economic well-being, education, equality, health and reconciliation. At community level, they commit to building leadership, creating jobs, the social economy and challenging racial prejudice. Confident in their unionism, they recognise that the Union is not a given; that it requires respect, pluralism and inclusivity; first and foremost, a home where people are welcomed, where staunch denominational attitudes do not consign individuals to exist in the dark corners. For them Unionism without such humanity and empathy is not unionism.
Asked by a civic nationalist friend: “Where are all these pro-Union and civic-unionists?” I replied: ‘ working to take sectarianism and racism out of sport, campaigning for women’s and LBGT rights, running ‘Marching to get Fit’ walks for bands, taking drama to cross-community venues, participating in Féile, making music with traditional musicians, organising foodbanks, supporting charities, writing books, learning Gaelic, exploring the culture and heritage they were not taught, running innovative Peace IV projects in the midst of the pandemic, engaging with ex-prisoners, renewing friendships that were interrupted by conflict, organising catch-up classes in literacy and mathematics, running businesses and schools, creating jobs and working in the public service, challenging patriarchy and misogyny, making Northern Ireland work by doing all the things that ‘ Unionists are not supposed to do; and not a banner or bonfire in sight! Why won’t civic nationalism engage?”
We are friends but I am growing frustrated with the ‘basket-case’ and ‘it’s all over’ mantra
Unlike civic nationalism, pro-Union advocates wants to act as a catalyst for reconciliation and transformation, to make Northern Ireland work for all, regardless of what the future may bring in terms of constitutional change, or not. This is something, in a post-Brexit world, that will not lie solely in the control of civic nationalists, political nationalists and republican voters in Northern Ireland; groups, the terminology for whom points largely to a distinction without a difference as the manner in which they pursue change renders problematic the vision they claim. For them to succeed, others have to fail.
It is a zero-sum approach. Rather than a dove of peace they act like a bird of prey. Determined in their misplaced confidence and in the interests of their long-term aspirations to present Northern Ireland as ‘a failed statelet or micro-jurisdiction ‘, it cannot be in their interests to make Northern Ireland work so the only equality they can offer is access to the ruins they want to represent. With some content to exist within their essentialism and assert claims as truth, it looks as if the task will fall to those who designate as pro-Union, more enlightened nationalists or those neither unionist nor nationalist.
Incremental change, the building of relationships, promising transition and growth taking place will be developed further. The future will be blended not shared. Sharing is a bridge over a gulf of latent differences; a half-way house accommodating superficial integration. You might as well leave the scorpions to which John Darby referred in his book Scorpions in a Bottle: Conflicting Cultures in Northern Ireland (1997) in the bottle. In so far as the description applies, pro-unionism wants to climb out of the bottle.
When that Unionist leader of the past spoke of unionism needing ‘a fight’ to be ‘at its best’ there may be a modicum of truth in what he said but he was in all probability thinking of old battles; references to meeting challenges would have delivered a more positive message. Much as you might wish too and political unionism tries hard, you cannot build the future by focusing on the past. Pro-union and civic unionist groups are modelling what can be achieved; open-eyed to the difficulties they breathe and provide evidence of how people from all backgrounds make Northern Ireland work in workplaces, through creativity and a desire to sustain progress.
It is not to deny historical problems but it is too easily forgotten and dismissed that prior to the outbreak of violence on the streets in 1968 towns and rural areas were, in the main, sites of community where inhabitants although wearing different labels worked, socialised and lived within and across diverse neighbourhoods. There was a sense of common purpose, humanity and trust.
It cannot be beyond the abilities of civic society to renew trust, confidence and the motivation to make Northern Ireland a home for all. The Good Friday Agreement provided the process. Politicians may be failing it but civic society can make and is making better choices. It is providing answers that politics is yet to discover.