Another aspect of the British government’s backward approach to the legacy process has been brought out of the shadows and into the light.
The Conservatives’ wretched Legacy Act means, among other things, that there are just weeks to go before the arbitrary May 1 deadline for Troubles inquests.
Cases which have not concluded by then will be transferred to a new body, the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery.
- British government accused of ‘supressing truth’ as NIO denies legacy political interventionOpens in new window
- Exclusive: Chris Heaton-Harris accused of ‘unprecedented political intervention’ in legacy inquestOpens in new window
- Family of LVF murder victim Fergal McCusker still seeking 'truth and justice'Opens in new window
One of the inquests involved in this race against the clock is that of Fergal McCusker. It seems inevitable that this is a race that the McCusker family won’t be able to see reach the finishing line, despite their quest for answers starting more than 26 years ago.
The 28-year-old from Maghera, Co Derry was murdered by the LVF as he made his way home from a night out on January 18 1998. His family believe his killing carries the hallmarks of collusion, and although four men were arrested, no-one has ever been charged in connection with Mr McCusker’s murder.
Mr McCusker’s inquest has been bogged down by the sort of foot-dragging from the security forces that has become a characteristic of these legacy cases.
As we have reported, it has emerged that the secretary of state has involved himself in a manner sufficiently unorthodox for the family’s barrister, Barra McGrory KC, to describe it during a hearing on Tuesday as an “unprecedented political intervention on behalf of the government to seek to circumvent the judicial process”.
The blunt rebuke was firmly resisted by Mr Boutcher, who reminded Mr Heaton-Harris that he was “independent of the executive and not subject to the direction or the control of government ministers...”
Mr Heaton-Harris had objected to suggestions that the coroner was considering making a gist, or summary, of intelligence linked to Mr McCusker’s case. He also questioned the actions of chief constable Jon Boutcher, and said he was concerned about his “public statement” on a gist provided by a coroner in another case: “Public comment on this matter without reference to me as secretary of state is unwelcome.”
The blunt rebuke was firmly resisted by Mr Boutcher, who reminded Mr Heaton-Harris that he was “independent of the executive and not subject to the direction or the control of government ministers…”
Mr Boutcher was correct to push back against Mr Heaton-Harris, though it should also be acknowledged that the PSNI has rarely cooperated as rapidly or as fully as it should in legacy inquests.
The NIO insists that Mr Heaton-Harris’s intervention was not of a political nature. Others will disagree.
These arcane rows could be avoided if the government, PSNI, MI5 and others shared the information they hold on murders like that of Mr McCusker.
Instead, a system has been designed which victims’ groups and the north’s politicians oppose and which is mired in legal challenges. What a disgraceful legacy for this dismal Tory government.
