Secretary of State Chris Heaton-Harris’ legal bid to prevent disclosure of sensitive information at a loyalist paramilitary murder victim’s inquest is to be dismissed, the Court of Appeal has ruled.
Senior judges rejected claims the coroner’s decision that a limited summary of some material should be released to the family of Paul Thompson would cause too much damage to national security.
Lady Chief Justice Dame Siobhan Keegan said: “We are not convinced that disclosure of the information would breach or depart from the (Government’s) NCND (Neither Confirm Nor Deny) policy.”
With similar issues at stake in other cases, lawyers for the Secretary of State immediately announced plans to appeal the ruling at the Supreme Court.
An order was made for a stay on any disclosure pending the outcome of those further legal attempts.
Mr Thompson, 25, was shot dead by the Ulster Freedom Fighters at Springfield Park while being given a lift in a taxi in April 1994.
At the long-delayed inquest into the killing the PSNI and Ministry of Defence requested Public Interest Immunity (PII) for a number of documents which would otherwise be disclosed.
Last month Coroner Louisa Fee granted PII for nearly all of the material, but concluded that a gist of information contained in one of seven PSNI folders was highly relevant and should be provided.
She determined the risk to national security was not at the level asserted, but also ruled that names, dates and intelligence were to be redacted to mitigate against any real risk of serious harm.
Although the PSNI and Government both initially challenged her plans, Chief Constable Jon Boutcher proposed a second version of the gist which could be released.
As tensions developed, the court heard the Secretary of State wrote to Mr Boutcher last month expressing “deep concern” at a “developing trend” towards departures from the NCND policy in legacy inquests.
In his reply, the Chief Constable denied taking any action to depart from the NCND policy.
He confirmed he had no intention of allowing the disclosure of information which would cause serious harm or real damage to national security or the public interest.
Following two failed judicial reviews, the Secretary of State mounted a further challenge at the Court of Appeal.
But by a two-one verdict, judges rejected claims that the coroner’s decision was irrational and involved an error of law.
“There’s a strong element of the need to facilitate open justice,” Dame Siobhan said.