Thursday, 5 April, 2001
Friday-Monday, 23-26 November, 2001
Wednesday, 12 December, 2001
Thursday-Sunday, 13-16 December, 2001
Thursday, 17 January, 2002
Thursday-Saturday, 17-19 January, 2002
Tuesday-Wednesday, 22-23 January, 2002
Tuesday, 12 February, 2002
Pat Finucane 13th Anniversary (3)
Tuesday, 19 March, 2002
Statement on behalf of Finucane family: Stobie may not face charges
The news that Billy Stobie will not stand trial does not surprise us. The public should not be fooled by what is going on here. The purpose of the Stevens police investigation is to thwart a public judicial inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane.
We can expect some further prosecutions. This has all been carefully choreographed to ensure that the police investigation and any prosecutions arising from it will postpone a public judicial inquiry indefinitely. The longer it goes on, the further away the decision to establish the inquiry.
If new charges are brought against anybody else perhaps those charges could be accompanied by an explanation as to why those charges could not have been brought two years ago.
Any such prosecutions will be controlled and directed by the DPP. The Finucane family will have no input into these prosecutions and will not be able to suggest relevant witnesses nor will they be allowed to ask any questions. They will not be given relevant documents. They will play no part in any of the public trials. The British Government will tell the people that the murder of Pat Finucane has been examined in public. The full circumstances surrounding the murder of Pat Finucane will not be publicly scrutinised.
The carpet is not big enough to hide this issue, which has now taken an international dimension.
On Thursday the United Nations in Geneva will examine the case of Pat Finucane once more. Param Cumaraswamy, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, will address the world delegates on the murders of Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson.
The British Government refused to reply to Mr. Cumaraswamy last year but said it would reply at a later date. Mr. Cumaraswamy will express his regret that to date he has not received a response from the British Government. He will also complain about the refusal of the British Government to give him the unpublished Stevens reports and that he has received no response from Tony Blair to a letter he sent on the 11 September 2000 supporting the establishment of a public judicial inquiry and stating that the Stevens investigation is not enough.
He will state that the British Government "…must be seen as a role model for accountability and transparency in the administration of justice."
Peter Madden, the Finucane family’s legal representative will attend the UN hearing in Geneva where submissions will be made on behalf of the family.
UN report released in Geneva
Below please find excerpts of the report from the UN Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Mr Dato' Param Cumaraswamy, relevant to the murders of Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson. The report, delivered today (5.4.01) at the UN Commission in Geneva, reveals that the RUC Chief Constable denied the top UN official access to the Stevens 1 and 11 reports.
United kingdom of Great Britain and Northern, Ireland
During the fifty-sixth session of the Commission on Human Rights the United Kingdom Government stated that it would not respond during the Commission, to the concerns contained in the Special Rapporteur's general report (E/CN.4/2000/61, paras, 303-322), rather it would respond directly to the Special Rapporteur at a later date. The Special Rapporteur regret's that as at the date of the writing of this report, he had not received a response.
Murder of Patrick Finucane
Observations
The Special Rapporteur reiterates his earlier calls for a judicial commission of inquiry into the Patrick Finucane murder, It is now nearly two years since the murder of Rosemary Nelson, Though some progress is said to have been made, the delay in concluding the investigations is a source of concern. In order to avoid any allegation of impunity being levelled against the Government over these murders it is in its interest to sot up a judicial commission of inquiry into both the murders. The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland must be seen as a role model for accountability and transparency in the administration of justice.
The Special Rapporteur urges the newly appointed police ombudsman to review all complaints of defence lawyers against RUC officers.......,
Friday-Monday, 23-26 November, 2001
Finucane murder case collapses, more delays seen
Cynicism and little surprise greeted the news Monday that the trial of the only man charged with the murder of Belfast human rights lawyer Pat Finucane 12 years ago collapsed today.
British forces are universally believed to have acted in concert with a loyalist death squad to carry out the killing of a man they depicted as an "IRA lawyer".
But after the prosecution said that they would be offering no evidence in the case, a formal verdict of not guilty was returned against loyalist William Stobie.
The case was withdrawn after the Director of Public Prosecutions said it was concerned about the mental state of the key witness, former British government press officer and journalist Neil Mulholland.
Mr Finucane was shot dead in front of his family in his North Belfast home in 1989. Stobie, a self confessed loyalist quartermaster and RUC police informer, supplied and disposed of the weapons used by the gang. He also admitted knowing the identity of the gang members who carried out the shooting.
Working as an agent for RUC Special Branch, Stobie said he informed his handlers at least twice of an imminent loyalist attack and identified the gang involved just prior to the killing.
Crucially, over a decade ago, in a statement to Mulholland, Stobie is believed to have admitted knowing Pat Finucane was the intended target. Shortly after making this admission, Stobie was arrested and interrogated by RUC Special Branch but released without charge. He has since denied knowing Finucane was the target.
The collapse of the case also meant a not guilty verdict being returned on Stobie over the murder of Protestant Adam Lambert in 1987. The student was working during his holidays on a north Belfast building site when he was killed by loyalist gunmen who mistook him for a Catholic.
Commenting on the decision to abandon the case, Hugh Orde, the police commissioner who had been in day-to-day control of the current investigation by British police chief John Stevens, insisted his officers had carried out a thorough investigation into the Finucane case.
But in a statement folliwng the trial's collapse, the Finucane family was scathing.
"The trial of Stobie was never a truth seeking process," they said. "We have maintained that the Stevens investigation and the prosecution of Stobie was a delaying tactic to thwart the establishment of a public inquiry. The Stevens investigation has delayed a public inquiry by at least 3 years, so it has served its purpose."
And they dismissed the announcement of a fresh judicial investigation as another delaying tactic to avoid a full public inquiry.
It was revealed that "a judge of international standing" would be appointed by April next year to conduct an investigation into the murder, and others in which there is evidence of Crown force collusion.
The Finucanes said the appointment would delay a public inquiry for another 4 to 5 years because the judge would be asked to review the evidence of half a dozen complex cases.
They insisted: "Justice demands that Tony Blair should announce the establishment of a public inquiry now.
"No amount of political deal making will dilute the family's entitlement to this very basic human right, the right to truth."
Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams MP has backed calls for a full public judicial inquiry into the Finucane killing. He said the collapse of the trial was predictable.
"From the beginning the British system and in particular the intelligence services responsible for collusion and the running of agents within the loyalist death squads, have used every means available to them to prevent the truth from emerging around Pat Finucane's case and hundreds of other similar killings.
"It is also clear that the [Director of Public Prosecutions] was reluctant to pursue a case which would have exposed the complicity of that office in preventing the full facts from becoming public.
"Sinn Fein supports the family in their demand for a full public judicial inquiry. This is the only real mechanism now available for uncovering the truth."
William Stobie shot dead
Statement from the Finucane family.
The Finucane family are shocked at the murder of Billy Stobie.The family did not want him murdered nor did they want him prosecuted. All they wanted was the truth.
There have been too many murders and too many grieving relatives.
If a public enquiry had been established into Pat's murder instead of the Steven's police investigation, Billy Stobie could have been granted anonymity and his identity unknown and he would probably still be alive today. ENDS
Background on William Stobie from the Pat Finucane Centre:
William Stobie, the former RUC Special Branch agent who supplied the guns used in the murder of Pat Finucane has been shot dead earlier this morning at a flat in north Belfast. Stobie, a former UDA quartermaster, had informed Special Branch in advance of the planned assasination of the prominent Belfast solicitor. An attempted prosecution of Stobie in connection with the Finucane murder and involvement in the earlier murder of Adam Lambert collapsed two weeks ago when a key witness was excused from giving evidence on medical grounds.
Stobie admitted his involvement in the Finucane murder ten years ago but neither the RUC nor the Director of Public Prosecutions took any action at the time fueling suspicions of state involvement in the killing. In a statement released through his lawyer following the collapse of the recent trial Stobie called for an inquiry into the the handling of the affair by the DPP and other agencies.Though Stobie's allegations have been in the public domain for some time the British Government have refused to grant the international demands for such an inquiry. Now the key witness has been silenced. By who? Ulster Television (UTV) carried an interview with Stobie in a programme broadcast last week. The transcript is available online at the PFC website www.serve.com/pfc
Press releases from Amnesty International and Committee on the Administration of Justice
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
UK: Inquiry needed into Stobie murder Amnesty International was seriously disturbed by the news that William Stobie was murdered this morning in North Belfast by armed gunmen. The Red Hand Defenders have claimed responsibility for the shooting.
"William Stobie's murder reinforces the need for the government to initiate immediately a full, independent and public inquiry into allegations of official collusion into the murder of Patrick Finucane," Amnesty International said. Patrick Finucane was a human rights lawyer, who was shot dead by the Ulster Defence Association (UDA, a Loyalist paramilitary group) in February 1989.
Charges against William Stobie -- of aiding and abetting in the murder of Patrick Finucane -- were dropped on 26 November, just two weeks ago. William Stobie had been a quartermaster of the UDA and an agent of Special Branch (police intelligence) during the time that Patrick Finucane was killed. He claimed that prior to the killing of Patrick Finucane, he had warned his Special Branch handlers that someone was about to be killed, and that he had provided enough details to possibly prevent the killing and to arrest people who still possessed the weapons after the killing. He claimed that the police had failed to act on this information. No charges were brought against him until 1999 when Sir John Stevens was requested by the Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary to return to Northern Ireland and investigate allegations of collusion in the murder of Patrick Finucane.
William Stobie was a key witness concerning allegations of official police collusion in the murder of Patrick Finucane. His claims that Special Branch may have been able to prevent the killing and of their failure to arrest the perpetrators, have never been tested in court. The involvement of Special Branch in allegedly obstructing the investigation into the killing of Patrick Finucane was raised again recently by an RUC officer, who claimed that one of the people who had shot Patrick Finucane had confessed on tape in 1991, in the presence of a Special Branch officer. He claimed that Special Branch blocked further investigation of the confession or any prosecution. It was alleged that the Special Branch officer was also William Stobie's handler.
"Given the allegations of Special Branch involvement in the killing of Patrick Finucane, the government should initiate a thorough, genuinely independent and impartial investigation into the killing of William Stobie," Amnesty International said.
STOBIE MURDER REINFORCES NEED FOR A PUBLIC INQUIRY
COMMITTEE ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
The Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ) said that the murder of William Stobie reinforced the need for a public inquiry into the Pat Finucane case.
CAJ also called on the government to ensure that a properly constituted and independent investigation takes place into the murder of Mr Stobie. "Not only is this murder a personal tragedy for Mr Stobie’s family, it also removes one of the most crucial witnesses who would have given evidence to a public inquiry about the links between the RUC and the murder of Pat Finucane. In that context public confidence is unlikely to be secured by an unsupervised police investigation into the Stobie murder" Mr Paul Mageean, Legal Officer with CAJ said.
CAJ said that if the government has any interest in establishing the truth of what happened to Pat Finucane and William Stobie, it must establish a public inquiry without further prevarication.
For further information please contact Paul Mageean or Martin O’Brien at 02890-961122.
Thursday-Sunday, 13-16 December, 2001
Analysis: Business as usual - the new beginning
By Gerry Kelly, MLA (Sinn Fein Spokesperson on Policing)
Since the Mandelson 'Police Bill' was published in May last year and up to the present Sinn Fein has been consistent and adamant that effective powers of inquiry must be given to ensure that the impunity with which the RUC has acted in the past does not become our future. This is critical to a new beginning to policing.
Recent events, reports and revelations again demonstrate the vital necessity for this. They also clearly show that this is not just a 'policing' problem but that it finds its centre in the securocrat empire of the NIO which continues to dominate the British Government's political agenda in a range of ways. More than anything else this is evidenced in the murder of Pat Finucane.
Nelson was granted immunity. Lyttle died of natural causes. Stobie was recently shot dead. Despite his status as a Special Branch agent and a threat to his life, incredibly, was afforded no protection. Not a single Special Branch member, Military Intelligence Officer or NIO securocrat has been held to account. Moreover, the British Police Act 2000, which some would have us believe is the promised new beginning, ensures that they cannot be held accountable. For under this the Chief Constable has the power to refuse to give up information on such activities by Special Branch officers and Special Branch agents. Accordingly the Oversight Commissioner Tom Constantine and the Ombudsman Nuala O'Loan have independently, in recent weeks, complained about the refusal by the Special Branch to co-operate with them and they do not have powers to compel them to do so. Conversely, however, the Chief Constable can reject outright any request for a report on such matters by the Policing Board.
Patten required, and with no ifs, ands or buts about it, that 'bad apples' - his euphemism for human rights abusers in the RUC - have to be dealt with. Not only is there no mechanism to do so but incredibly it is quite likely that RUC members who were in the Special Branch, say 7 years ago at the time of the first IRA cessation, can still be in the Special Branch several years from now; acting with the same impunity; with the same lack of democratic accountability; with the same support, as in the past, from the British Government. The British Government legislation on policing guarantees this. It was crafted to have this effect and any amendment to this mooted so far by the British Government, for some point in the indefinite future will do nothing to resolve this.
The Police Act handcuffs the Policing Board so as to make inquiries into violations of human rights by the RUC virtually impossible by erecting a series of procedural hurdles.
Robust, rigorous and unfettered powers of inquiry are required by the Policing Board and the Ombudsman. We need to know the truth about the murders of Pat Finucane, Rosemary Nelson, Robert Hamill, Pearse Jordan, and of Sam Devenny, Patrick Rooney, Nora McCabe, and Padraig Kelly. We need to know the truth about collusion between loyalists and the Crown Forces over 300 people were killed. For true accountability, we need to know what happened and why. And once the RUC's 'wall of silence' has been knocked down, only true accountability will ensure that wall can never be rebuilt. That is the guarantee every democrat, nationalist and republican needs: that what has happened will never, ever happen again. That guarantee needs to be in law. If the British government will not do that, then the new beginning to policing cannot commence. The Police Act must be amended to ensure that the legacy of past does not remain the policy of policing in the future.
Thursday-Saturday, 17-19 January, 2002
International Judge is a stalling device
Bernadette McQuillan, sister of murdered Lurgan solicitor Rosemary Nelson, branded the British government’s proposal to appoint an international judge to look at her murder along with Pat Finucane’s "a stalling device" to avoid a proper inquiry. There is compelling evidence that both Rosemary Nelson and Pat Finucane were killed by loyalists with the help of the state. (Irish News, Belfast)
Thursday-Saturday, 17-19 January, 2002
Britain colluded in Finucane murder, says human rights chief
British Crown forces colluded with loyalist paramilitaries to murder Belfast lawyer Pat Finucane, the head of the Human Rights Commission said yesterday.
Speaking in Dublin, Professor Bryce Dickson said he was "sufficiently convinced" that British forces plotted with loyalists to kill Pat Finucane.
At the very least, he said, collusion went as far as the failure to bring the killers to justice.
He said the case was just part of a "very nasty can of worms" regarding the handling of police informers in the North of Ireland.
Last month's report by police ombudsman Nuala O'Loan was some indication of unexposed "horrors" in this area, he said.
Mr Dickson added to calls from Mr Finucane's family yesterday for an independent judicial inquiry into the killing, saying existing plans for an international judge to investigate the death as one of six incidents would not "go far enough".
Human rights lawyer Mr Finucane was shot dead outside his home nearly 13 years ago.
Former Ulster Defence Association quartermaster William Stobie was tried for conspiracy to murder him, but the case collapsed last year when a key witness was deemed medically unfit to give evidence.
Last month Stobie was shot dead outside his Belfast home in suspicious circumstances.
Mr Dickson told the conference at Dublin Castle: "To date we have been sufficiently convinced by the quantity and quality of the evidence available to us that there has been collusion between loyalist paramilitaries and the British security forces in the murder of Patrick Finucane - or at the very least in the failure to bring people to book for the killing.
"We have therefore added our names to the long list of those who are calling for a public judicial inquiry into Mr Finucane's murder."
He added: "I do not think the inquiry called for by the UK and Irish governments in the Weston Park document of August 2001 will go far enough to allay our concerns on that case."
The Human Rights Commission was set up by the British government under the Good Friday Agreement and its support will add to the pressure for an immediate public inquiry.
One of the first incidents the commission investigated was the 1999 death of human rights solicitor Rosemary Nelson.
The conference - organised by Irish-based human rights group Front Line - heard yesterday from her sister Bernadette McQuillan, who again said the family believed there was collusion between British Crown forces and loyalist paramilitaries to kill her.
The Human Rights Commission had been involved in the examination of the work of Special Branch officers in handling police informants in the province, Prof Dickson said.
"I firmly believe that there is a very nasty can of worms to be opened as far as that particular kind of activity is concerned," he said.
"The recent report by the police ombudsman, Mrs Nuala O'Loan, regarding the police investigation into the Omagh bombing in 1998 is some indication of what horrors may still need to be uncovered," he said.
He praised the work of investigative journalists such as Martin O'Hagan, murdered last year, and human rights groups in Ireland and abroad who have worked to expose collusion.
Tuesday-Wednesday, 22-23 January, 2002
Collusion families demand info on Britain's 'dirty war'
Relatives of assasinated defence lawyers Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson have rejected the British and Irish governments' appointment of an international judge to review six collusion cases as a stalling tactic.
Bertie Ahern told a human rights conference in Dublin last week that a judge "of international standard" would be appointed by next April and both the British and Irish governments would abide by the findings and recommendations.
However, relatives and campaigners dismissed the review as another stalling tactic following the collapse of the third police inquiry. Speaking for the first time since her sister's Rosemary's death, Bernadette McQuillan said the proposal was a device "to prevent the truth being told".
Geraldine Finucane said this latest proposal added to the family's belief that "one of the factors in refusing a public inquiry has been the suspicion that the British government at its highest level was involved in Pat's death.
"We would like to know who was involved in the Joint Intelligence Committee who were assessing the flow of information from the North. We want to know did they have prior knowledge of the threats to lawyers in the North?"
The Joint Intelligence Committee answered directly to the then British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and included members of the British armed forces, British Intelligence, the Ministry of Defence, Home Office and British officials in Ireland. Thatcher in turn briefed other members of the British government, including the then Attorney General Patrick Mayhew.
The committee, whose membership has never been disclosed, were given details of intelligence collected by the RUC and British Army in the North of Ireland. Amongst those supplying intelligence was FRU agent Brian Nelson, already exposed as a key player in the Finucane killing.
COLLUSION HIGHLIGHTED AT ASSEMBLY
Mitchel McLaughlin drew attention this week to the evidence of collusion between British Intelligence and loyalists in a debate at the Belfast Assembly. With the debate focussed on the 1974 Dublin and Monaghan bombings, he said:
"In the context of a conflict resolution process, it is important that we examine the clear evidence relating to many incidents, particularly multiple killings by loyalist gangs that were later shown to have been penetrated, and sometimes controlled, by RUC Special Branch or British military intelligence. The Dublin and Monaghan bombings are a particularly horrific example of that.
"Other examples are easily brought to mind, and the current controversy over the investigation - if it is appropriate to call it that - into the Omagh bombing shows that a hidden hand is at work. Republican, nationalist and, in particular, unionist representatives must address that dimension of the 'dirty war' in Ireland, because without it there can never be full reconciliation, closure or peace.
"These events happened almost 28 years ago. Since then, strenuous efforts have been made to understand the inexplicable failure to follow through on available evidence and to examine the precision that had never been demonstrated before or since by the UVF gang that claimed responsibility and which subsequently claimed to have acted on its own. That happened despite evidence from court records at the time, and for a long time afterwards, that the gang had been penetrated by British military intelligence.
"Why did the authorities in the 26 Counties fail to confront and deal with this suppression of information? Why was the Garda inquiry wound down within three months? It is significant that when the Omagh investigation is scrutinised, exactly the same pattern emerges. First, there is an initial response, when the government appear to act with authority and urgency and resources are poured into the investigation. Subsequently, that turns out to have been a façade, important information has been suppressed and in some instances important evidence has been destroyed. After much propaganda and publicity, the investigation is substantially wound down.
"In the case of Dublin and Monaghan, there is a linkage to the difficulties that are now confronting those who are bringing forward arguments for full accountability and transparency. The answer is to be found in exposing, once and for all, the role of British military intelligence and the RUC Special Branch in the manipulation of those Loyalist death squads over that period of time."
Pat Finucane 13th Anniversary
Today [February 12, 2002] on the thirteenth anniversary of the murder of Pat Finucane by the UDA, RUC Special Branch and the Force Research Unit of the British Army, an unprecedented number of human rights NGOs have released a statement calling for a public inquiry into the murder.
The Law Society (England and Wales), the Law Society of Northern Ireland and the Human Rights Committee of the Bar Council (Northern Ireland) have also issued a joint statement.
An opinion piece from Peter Madden, partner in the law firm Madden & Finucane, and widelty published today, is included below.
Also today, the New York based Lawyers Committee on Human Rights have released a extensive report on the case at a press conference in Belfast. The Preface, Executive Summary and Recommendations are included below. The full report -- Beyond Collusion: The UK Security Forces and the Murder of Pat Finucane -- and other reports can be found at the website of the Pat Finucane Centre at http://www.serve.com/pfc
Joint statement by human rights groups/NGOs
Statement on the anniversary of the murder of Patrick Finucane - No inquiry 13 years later
We, the undersigned international and domestic NGOs, deplore the UK Government's failure to initiate a public judicial inquiry into the full circumstances of the killing of human rights lawyer Patrick Finucane 13 years ago. Patrick Finucane was shot dead on 12 February 1989 by Loyalist paramilitaries; since then, evidence has emerged which strongly suggests that there was official collusion by both the army and the police in his killing, and a subsequent cover-up. The UK government has steadfastly resisted repeated calls for a public judicial inquiry into all aspects of his killing, including the allegations of collusion and cover-up. Calls for an inquiry have come from the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, international and domestic NGOs, the Finucane family, the House of Representatives of the US Congress, the Irish government, and over two thousand national and international lawyers.
Despite the ongoing police investigation into Patrick Finucane's killing -- which to date has not resulted in successful prosecutions against any of those involved -- we continue to urge the UK government to establish immediately such an inquiry because we believe that it is the only mechanism which could provide an effective and public investigation into the serious allegations in this case.
William Stobie, a key witness in connection with the case, was murdered in December 2001, and other key witnesses are in fear for their lives. Vital evidence has already disappeared. We are particularly concerned that the longer the government deliberately delays, the greater the risk that the future public inquiry will be hampered.
Amnesty International, British Irish Rights Watch, Committee on the Administration of Justice, Human Rights Watch, International Commission of Jurists, International Federation for Human Rights, Irish Council for Civil Liberties, Lawyers Committee for Human Rights Liberty, Pat Finucane Centre, Relatives for Justice, Scottish Human Rights Centre
Joint statement by law societies
Joint Statement issued by the Law Society (England and Wales), the Law Society of Northern Ireland and the Human Rights Committee of the Bar Council (Northern Ireland)
Today is the 13th anniversary of the murder of Belfast solicitor Patrick Finucane. On this day, we renew our calls to the Government of the United Kingdom to hold, without further delay, an independent public judicial inquiry into the full circumstances of his killing, including into the question of any state collusion in his death.
Previous and on-going investigations into Patrick Finucane's murder have failed to provide answers to the evidence which has emerged over the last 13 years and which suggest official involvement. We believe it is of the utmost importance that the Government act now. William Stobie, a key witness, was murdered in December 2001 and vital evidence has already disappeared.
We wish to remind the Government that it has obligations in national and international law to investigate this case thoroughly and impartially, including under the United Nations Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (1989), Article 11 of which states;
"In cases in which the established investigative procedures are inadequate because of lack of expertise or impartiality, because of the importance of the matter or because of the apparent existence of a pattern of abuse, and in cases where there are complaints from the family of the victim about these inadequacies or other substantial reasons, Governments shall pursue investigations through an independent commission of inquiry or similar procedure. Members of such a commission shall be chosen for their recognized impartiality, competence and independence as individuals. In particular, they shall be independent of any institution, agency or person that may be the subject of the inquiry. The commission shall have the authority to obtain all information necessary to the inquiry and shall conduct the inquiry as provided for under these Principles."
Truth Or Continuing Cover Up? - analysis by Peter Madden
A Full Public Judicial Inquiry Now
By Peter Madden, Madden & Finucane Solicitors, Co-founder and law partner of the late Pat Finucane
The Finucane family's long campaign to find the hidden truth behind the UDA murder of Pat Finucane, seems set to continue, despite the Weston Park proposal of the appointment of an international judge to "thoroughly investigate" six cases, including Pat's case.
Make no mistake about it. This is not the public judicial inquiry that the family has been campaigning for. It is not the public inquiry that the family are entitled to. This is a private, behind closed doors, judicial investigation similar to the Dublin/Monaghan investigation and probably does not meet the requirements of European Convention on Human Rights. The Human Rights Commissioner, Brice Dickson has recently said so.
The six cases:- the killings of Pat Finucane, Rosemary Nelson, Robert Hamill, Billy Wright, Bob Buchanan and Harry Breen, and Lord Justice Maurice Gibson and his wife Cecily, - have been highlighted by the two governments as representing nationalist and unionist concerns about state involvement in murder.
Nationalist and Unionist leaders have also highlighted these cases. They are cases of "urgent public importance". What could be more important than allegations of a state's involvement in the murder of its own citizens?
In British law, if a matter is of "urgent public importance" and has been passed by both houses of parliament then a public inquiry under the Tribunals of Inquiry Act 1921 must be established. Such an inquiry will have all the powers of the High Court to call for relevant material and subpoena relevant witnesses who can be questioned in public.
If the two governments and the local political leaders have highlighted these cases then why not establish public inquiries in these cases immediately? Why go to the time and expense of appointing a judge to hold six private investigations, particularly if it is likely that full public inquiries will be set up afterwards? It doesn't make any sense.
Unless, of course, the real reason for the appointment is delay or, more concerning to the Finucane family, if the real reason is to prevent the establish a full public judicial inquiry by the establishment of something less in the guise of something more.
The Finucane family want the truth. They don't want a report from a judge who examines the facts in secret and then publishes a report which purports to be the truth.
The facts should be examined in public where the family can challenge any purported explanation or denial. They are entitled to have an input into the calling of relevant evidence and the questioning of relevant witnesses.
They will be able to do none of this if the Weston Park proposals are implemented.
It will take a very long time for any judge to "thoroughly investigate" six complex cases.
That is why the Finucane family see this effort as a cynical exercise in delaying or attempting to prevent the inevitable.
They took the same view when John Stevens was appointed, for the third time, to re investigate Pat's murder. The family decided to treat the Stevens police investigation as a delaying tactic and the public can decide if the family took the correct approach.
The third Stevens investigation or Stevens 3, as it is known, resulted in a delay of three years. A trial resulted in which Billy Stobie was acquitted. He was subsequently murdered. The Stevens report, whether published or not will instil no confidence that Pat's case was thoroughly investigated no more than the establishment of a judge to privately investigate the same thing in which the family have no meaningful input.
The Finucane family were not informed that Pat's case was going to be used by the two governments as a "bargaining chip" in the peace process.
The case has been the subject of a high profile campaign for thirteen years.
What is emerging and what is now in the public domain is a picture of the British government's involvement in the murder of its own citizens. The British military unit which directed Brian Nelson who directed the UDA, was apparently involved in hundreds of murders of nationalists and republicans, including that of Pat Finucane. That is the allegation. That allegation has been published time and time again by many investigative journalists. Pat Finucane was subjected to death threats from RUC officers in Castlereagh Interrogation Centre prior to his murder. These threats were documented prior to his murder. Douglas Hogg, the British Home Office Minister made a statement in the House of Commons that some solicitors were sympathetic to the IRA, three weeks before the murder. Pat was murdered with a British Army browning pistol. Brian Nelson, the British army agent , who directed the murder, was directed by the secret British Army unit, the Force Research Unit (FRU). Billy Stobie, who was an RUC agent provided the weapons for the murder.
In 1999 on the 10th anniversary of Pat's murder, British Irish Rights Watch compiled a report which included copies of British military documentation. The documents contained information which led to the clear conclusion that the military unit ( the FRU ) were involved in conspiracy to murder.
The Report was handed to the British Government with a request to authenticate the documents. So far they have not refuted the allegation that the documents are genuine.
The disturbing thing is that they have not denied that such a conspiracy existed.
The European Court rulings last May ( Jordan, McKerr, Shanaghan, and Kelly v UK ) severely criticised the British Government for their failure to provide a proper investigative process for hundreds of cases involving state or loyalist killings.
The six cases highlighted at Weston Park are not the only cases in which there are serious concerns about state involvement in murder. The four cases taken to Strasbourg were representative of hundreds of cases which, over a thirty year period, were not properly investigated.
Tony Blair said, when he established the Saville Inquiry into Bloody Sunday, that
"Bloody Sunday was different because, where the state's own authorities are concerned, we must be as sure as we can of the truth, precisely because we pride ourselves on our democracy and respect for the law, and on the professionalism and dedication of our security forces."
The Finucane family and other human rights organisations such as the Human Rights Commission do not regard the Weston Park proposals as satisfying the requirements of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
They do not see why they have to get over another hurdle.
The campaign will continue. The family will continue to seek support. They have waited long enough for the truth.
Pat Finucane in his short career sought justice for a large number of people. He was too successful.
I have to play my part in seeking justice for him. I owe him that at least.
Beyond Collusion - Report of Lawyers Committee on Human Rights
The UK Security Forces and the Murder of Patrick Finucane
Full text available at http://www.serve.com/pfc/pf/pf12022002c.html
PREFACE
This report examines allegations of state involvement in the murder of Patrick Finucane, a prominent Belfast human rights lawyer who was murdered on February 12, 1989. In this report, we piece together the evidence of state involvement that has emerged gradually in the 13 years since Finucane was murdered. We also present new allegations of security force involvement in the killing and subsequent cover-ups. With this report, we hope to force the UK government, by the weight of evidence, to finally carry out a public inquiry into Patrick Finucane's murder.
Over the last ten years, the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights has conducted a series of missions to examine the human rights situation in Northern Ireland. Based on those missions and extensive outside research, we have published two previous reports on Northern Ireland, the first in 1993 and the second in 1996. Both of these reports considered unfolding allegations of state involvement in Finucane's murder. In addition, our first report, Human Rights and Legal Defense in Northern Ireland, looked into claims that members of the security forces had systematically harassed and intimidated defense lawyers. Our second report, At the Crossroads: Human Rights and the Northern Ireland Peace Process, examined two main issues in addition to the Finucane murder. The first was the continued reliance on emergency legislation by both the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. The second was the role of the judiciary in implementing the emergency law framework and in facilitating the transition to the rule of ordinary law.
The new allegations of state involvement in Finucane's murder discussed in this report are based on information gatduring a fact-finding mission to Northern Ireland in June 2001, as well as on a series of follow-up interviews. The members of the mission delegation were Michael Posner, Executive Director of the Lawyers Committee; Martin Flaherty, Professor at Fordham Law School; and Meg Satterthwaite, Policing Fellow at the Lawyers Committee, who also conducted a preliminary fact-finding mission. The follow-up interviews were conducted by Fiona Doherty, Policing Fellow at the Lawyers Committee. The report also draws on information gathered during our previous missions to Northern Ireland as well as on the work of other human rights groups and journalists on the Finucane case. The report was written by Meg Satterthwaite and Fiona Doherty.
We would like to thank the many staff members and friends of the Lawyers Committee who participated in our previous missions to Northern Ireland, especially Elisa Massimino, the director of our Washington, D.C. office. Our report would not have been possible without the assistance of local human rights organizations. In particular, we are grateful to Jane Winter of British Irish Rights Watch, who provided us with invaluable assistance, as she has done for many years. We also record our long-standing debt to the Committee on the Administration of Justice, especially Martin O'Brien, Paul Mageean, Maggie Beirne, and Liz Martin. We also gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Fionnuala Ni Aolain and Martin Flaherty. Finally, we would like to express our gratitude to the family of Patrick Finucane.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Patrick Finucane was a high-profile solicitor in Northern Ireland in the late 1970s and 1980s. He was well known for his work in representing people arrested under the emergency or anti-terrorism laws and for his use of litigation to challenge the legal framework in which the UK security forces operated. On the evening of February 12, 1989, masked gunmen broke into Finucane's home and shot him 14 times in front of his wife and three children. The next day, the Ulster Freedom Fighters (UFF) claimed responsibility for the killing. The UFF is a cover name used by the Ulster Defense Association (UDA), the largest loyalist paramilitary group in Northern Ireland.
Over the last 13 years, there have been persistent reports that members of the UK security forces were involved in the Finucane murder. The UK government has firmly resisted calls to establish a public inquiry into the killing, however, claiming that this could prejudice on-going criminal investigations. In addition to the investigation by Northern Ireland's Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), there have been three separate criminal investigations led by Sir John Stevens, the current Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in London. The findings of the first two Stevens investigations have remained largely classified and the third, established in 1999, is still ongoing. Despite these official investigations, no one has ever been successfully prosecuted for Patrick Finucane's murder.
Over the last ten years, the Lawyers Committee has conducted a series of missions to Northern Ireland to investigate reports of official collusion in the murder. The evidence that has emerged over this period extends far beyond isolated acts of collusion by individual members of the security forces and implicates the very foundations of the government's security policy in Northern Ireland. There are many allegations that units within both the British Army and the RUC were involved at an institutional level in the murder and subsequent cover-up.
This report is designed to provide a comprehensive look at Patrick Finucane's case on the 13th anniversary of his murder. The report binds together information that has gradually become public over the last 13 years. The report also contains new information about state involvement in the case, such as:
A recently-retired police officer details the many threats he received from officers in the RUC's intelligence division in response to his attempts to pursue the prosecution of a man who had confessed to being one of the two gunmen in the murder.
The Army's Force Research Unit (FRU) and Brian Nelson
The Force Research Unit (FRU) was a covert unit of the British Army that infiltrated agents into republican and loyalist paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland. FRU officers, operating as "handlers," debriefed and counseled these agents. Documents recording the contacts between FRU agents and their handlers have revealed that the purpose of the FRU, at least with respect to loyalist paramilitary groups, was to redirect the killing power of loyalist paramilitaries away from random sectarian killings towards "legitimate" republican targets.
In 1987, the FRU recruited Brian Nelson to infiltrate the intelligence structure of the UDA. With the active assistance and resources of the FRU, Nelson soon brought new professionalism to the UDA's information-gathering system. According to multiple sources, Brian Nelson prepared targeting information on Patrick Finucane with the knowledge of his FRU handlers. FRU documents pertaining to Nelson were withheld from the Stevens investigations and subsequently found to have been altered. On the night before Stevens planned to arrest Nelson as part of his first investigation, Nelson fled to England and Stevens's offices were destroyed by a fire. According to an FRU whistleblower, that fire was set by the British Army.
RUC Special Branch and William Stobie
A second intelligence agency implicated in the Finucane murder is RUC Special Branch. Repeatedly described as "a force within a force," Special Branch is a unit so secretive that even other RUC officers do not know about its activities. Like the FRU, Special Branch ran agents in Northern Ireland's paramilitary organizations. At the time of the Finucane murder, William Stobie was simultaneously an agent for Special Branch and a quartermaster for the UDA in West Belfast. As quartermaster, Stobie was responsible for supplying weapons for UDA missions in his area.
In September 1990, William Stobie was detained for seven days and repeatedly interrogated by officers of the RUC's Criminal Investigations Division (CID). Stobie admitted that several days before Patrick Finucane's murder, a UDA superior had instructed him to supply guns for an operation. Stobie also admitted that he had retrieved the weapons after the murder. During the interrogation, Stobie also explained that he was an agent for Special Branch. He insisted that he had kept his handlers fully informed of developments as they arose and that Special Branch had known the names of the UDA members involved. Despite his admissions, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) decided on January 16, 1991 not to charge Stobie in connection with Finucane's murder.
Martin Ingram's Allegations
The Lawyers Committee has conducted a series of interviews with a former FRU officer, who spoke to us under the pseudonym Martin Ingram. According to Ingram, there were three separate UDA plans to assassinate Patrick Finucane. The first two plans were thwarted, but the third succeeded. Ingram claims that both the FRU and Special Branch knew that the UDA was targeting Patrick Finucane. He says that they also knew, in the run up to the killing, that there had already been two attempts against his life. Despite this, Finucane was not warned of the dangers that he faced.
Ingram told the Lawyers Committee that he did not know whether the FRU had advance knowledge of the third plan. He explained that although Brian Nelson was responsible for gathering intelligence for UDA killing teams, he would not necessarily have known the date and time of impending attacks. Martin Ingram believed that Special Branch must have had advance knowledge of the third attack, however, given its own sources within the UDA in West Belfast. Ingram told us that Special Branch should have been electronically monitoring the weapons under William Stobie's control. He also told us that he knew with "cast iron certainty" that the leader of the UDA in West Belfast was working for Special Branch at the time of Finucane's murder. This UDA leader, Tommy "Tucker" Lyttle, was in charge of both Nelson and Stobie. Ingram claimed that it was Lyttle who instructed Nelson to compile targeting information on Finucane.
The Possible Instigation of the Murder by RUC Officers
These allegations concerning Lyttle are highly significant in the context of reports that RUC officers actively procured Finucane's murder. In 1992, a source found reliable by the Lawyers Committee informed us that three weeks before Patrick Finucane's murder, RUC officers told three prominent UDA men under police detention that the UDA should target Patrick Finucane. In 1995, BBC journalist John Ware published an article detailing a similar scenario. Ware had interviewed Tucker Lyttle before his death in October 1995. Lyttle confirmed that two RUC detectives had originally suggested the idea of murdering Finucane. Lyttle told Ware that when this suggestion was relayed to him, he was so astonished that he asked a "regular contact" in Special Branch why Finucane was being pushed. Lyttle claimed that this contact had not discouraged the idea that Finucane should be shot.
The Prosecution and Subsequent Murder of William Stobie
In 1999, a few months after Stevens began his third investigation, William Stobie was charged with the murder of Patrick Finucane. In his defense, Stobie claimed that he had not known that Finucane was the target before the murder. He also claimed that he had given his Special Branch handlers enough information to prevent the killing (and in the alternative to apprehend the killers and retrieve the murder weapons). He also claimed that given his 1990 admissions, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) had long possessed the information on which the charges were based. After extensive delays, the DPP ultimately did not offer any evidence in the case. William Stobie was found not guilty on November 26, 2001. The next day, he called for a public inquiry into the murder of Patrick Finucane.
Two weeks later, William Stobie was ambushed outside his home and shot several times at close range, reportedly by the UDA. The UK government knew that Stobie was at risk from the UDA, but failed to protect him. Stobie had repeatedly applied for government protection after his role as a double agent was exposed in 1999. Working in conjunction with Stobie's solicitor, the Lawyers Committee had raised Stobie's need for official protection with many UK government officials. Although Stobie had requested only modest security measures, the government denied his applications.
Cover Up: Special Branch and the Story of Johnston Brown
In late 2000, news surfaced that Special Branch had blocked attempts by fellow RUC officers to prosecute one of the two gunmen in the Finucane murder. These allegations were made by CID officer Johnston Brown. Brown claimed that on October 3, 1991, a prominent loyalist had confessed to being one of the two gunmen in the murder. Instead of pursuing a prosecution, however, Special Branch decided to recruit the confessor as an informer.
In interviews with the Lawyers Committee, Brown explained that he had vigorously opposed Special Branch's decision not to pursue the prosecution. As a result, he and his partner were harassed and threatened by Special Branch officers. In November 1991, for example, he learned that Special Branch officers had tipped off the confessor about Brown's desire to prosecute him, a move that placed Brown's life in immediate danger. In April 1999, Brown told the Stevens III team about the 1991 confession. A Special Branch officer later threatened to have guns planted in his home. Brown told the Lawyers Committee that he still feels very much under threat from Special Branch.
RECOMMENDATIONS
On the 13th anniversary of Patrick Finucane's murder, the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights calls on the UK government to take the following steps:
I. Abandon the Weston Park Proposal
Following the political negotiations at Weston Park in July 2001, the UK and Irish governments announced that they would jointly appoint "a judge of international standing from outside both jurisdictions to undertake a thorough investigation of collusion" in the murder of Patrick Finucane, as well as in five other controversial cases. The governments revealed that in all six cases, the international judge would be asked to review all the papers, interview "anyone who can help," and report back with recommendations (which could include the establishment of a public inquiry).
The Lawyers Committee is deeply dissatisfied with this proposal. How is one judge - with currently undefined powers - to review the papers and interview witnesses in all six of these complicated cases? The Finucane case, alone, has been active for much of the last 13 years. The Lawyers Committee believes that the international judge proposal will prevent the truth from emerging in these cases for many years to come.
II. Establish a Public Inquiry into Patrick Finucane's Murder
The Lawyers Committee believes that the official investigations into Finucane's murder have not satisfied the requirements of international law. Under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, for example, the investigation must be carried out independently from the members of the security forces implicated in the killing. Despite this, we understand that all three Stevens investigations were instigated by the RUC and report back to the RUC.* Article 2 also requires that the investigation have a sufficient element of public scrutiny to secure practical accountability. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also requires an open and accountable investigation. The investigations have remained largely classified, however.
Given the deficiencies of the official investigations to date, we believe that the UK must immediately establish a public inquiry in the Finucane case. Indeed, as the government delays, critical evidence has disappeared and witnesses are afraid for their lives.** On December 12, 2001, William Stobie was murdered shortly after he called for a public inquiry into the killing. The government had refused his applications for protection.
The long list of those who have supported the call for a public inquiry includes the Irish government, the U.S. House of Representatives, the European Parliament, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, and the U.N. Special Representative of the Secretary General on Human Rights Defenders. The Lawyers Committee believes that a public inquiry in the Finucane case should be conducted by an independent tribunal operating with the powers of the High Court.
III. Commit to the Accountability and Reform of the Security Services
A central element of the 1998 Good Friday agreement was a transformation of the RUC into a police service built around notions of accountability and human rights. These two themes - accountability and respect for human rights - were building blocks for the September 1999 report of the Independent Commission on Policing (the "Patten" Commission). As the government has taken steps to implement police reform, no issue has loomed more important to the success of that effort than creating a visible sense of accountability. In particular there continues to be a widely held perception that police officers and other members of the security forces who act outside the law have not and will not be held accountable for their actions. That perception is particularly stark in relation to the members of intelligence units.
No case better illustrates this problem than the murder of Patrick Finucane. In the 13 years since Finucane was gunned down in his home, the evidence of security force involvement in the murder and subsequent cover up has continued to swell. Despite this, the record demonstrates a decided lack of political will to get at and make public the full truth about what happened. This failure to publicly uncover the truth undercuts the government's commitment to fundamental principles of democratic accountability.
Lawyers Committee on Human Rights
Rosemary Nelson 1958-1999
A minute's silence will be held at Free Derry Corner at 1.00pm today, Friday 15 March 2002, to mark the third anniversary of the murder of solicitor and human rights defender Rosemary Nelson, murdered outside her Lurgan home on 15 March 1999.
The Pat Finucane Centre urges anyone who can make it to Free Derry Corner today to come and honour the minute's silence in memory of Rosemary, and to support the campaign for a full and independent inquiry into her death.
A spokesperson for the PFC said:
"It is three years now since Rosemary was murdered, and the so called police investigation has not resulted in one single charge directly related to her murder. We don't believe that with the well documented history of RUC harassment and threats against Rosemary and her clients, and with such compelling evidence of RUC involvement in her murder, that the RUC/PSNI, or any English officers working alongside the RUC/PSNI, can be trusted to investigate her murder.
"There must be a full independent judicial inquiry into Rosemary's death to uncover the true circumstances of her murder, and the extent of security force involvement in it."
Top Secret files stolen from inside heavily guarded Police complex
Special Branch Break-In 'Breach of National Security'
The British Secretary of State John Reid MP has announced an independent inquiry into the 'break-in' and theft of sensitive documents at an Special Branch office inside the heavily guarded Castlereagh Police complex in East Belfast. On St Patricks night three men entered a controlled access area of the complex, assaulted and tied up a Special Branch officer and then made off with a number of documents. In a statement today the Secretary of State described the raid as a breach of 'national security'. Given the location of the internal office and the security surrounding the complex rumours are rampant that this was an inside job. The Unionist Mayor of Belfast, Jim Rodgers, has already blamed the 'security services' for the theft while SDLP spokesman Alban Maginness has talked of a scandal of 'Watergate' proportions.
Speculation regarding the content of the stolen files has reached fever pich with some suggestions that they may have contained top secret information on 'intelligence assets', ie informers. It seems ironic that the theft of documents would provoke the immediate announcement of an independent review while credible evidence of Special Branch collusion in actual murders has not resulted in an independent inquiry. This is not the first occasion when the 'dirty war' has led to bizarre behaviour among the various agencies involved.
On January 10 1990, as preparations were underway to arrest British Army agent Brian Nelson, a mysterious fire destroyed the office of the investigation team who had been brought in from England to investigate allegations of collusion between the security forces and loyalist paramilitaries. The team was led by John Stevens and was based at a 'secure' RUC premises in Seapark. Nelson, an agent of the British Army Force Research Unit (FRU), was involved in the murder of Pat Finucane Last year it was claimed by a former FRU agent, Martin Ingram, that the break-in and fire was the work of a Controlled Methods of Entry unit of the British Army based at Repton Manor in England.
Stevens is presently involved in the third investigation into the activities of FRU and the murder of Pat Finucane and detectives from his team seized 'large quantities of documents' from British Army HQ in Lisburn in August 2000.(Irish News 14.8.2000)
Last December William Stobie, the Special Branch agent who supplied the weapons used in the murder of Pat Finucane, was murdered shortly after the collapse of a criminal trial. Loyalist paramilitaries claimed the murder but there was speculation that the elimination of such an important witness to a future inquiry served the purposes of Special Branch.
The sensitive information which Special Branch keeps in its files may well include a taped confession from the man suspected of the murder of Pat Finucane. It was revealed in a television documentary last year that this had been withheld from the Stevens team. The individual who boasted of the killing fled the North after Stobie's murder and is believed to have sought protection from the Stevens team. (see www.serve.com/pfc for more details and transcript of UTV documentary from May 2001.
So who was responsible for the weekend raid...? FRU, MI5, MI6, 14th Intelligence Unit, or even Special Branch? Answers on a postcard to John Gordon Kerr, Military Attache at the British Embassy in Beijing and former Officer Commanding FRU or Ronnie Flanagan, former head of Special Branch.