I will briefly talk about the structures of the commission and how we operate before discussing the processes we use to try to recover and repatriate victims. The commission was established in 1999 as part of the Good Friday Agreement and is jointly funded by the two governments. Broadly parallel legislation operates in both jurisdictions. Wherever we operate on the island of Ireland or in the United Kingdom, we are covered by the relevant legislation. Our objectives are to receive information, disclose the information, locate and recover victims and provide reports annually to the two governments. Victims are defined in the legislation as those killed as a result of action by unlawful organisation before 10 April 1998.
The evidence obtained directly or indirectly is not admissible in any criminal proceedings and, therefore, information passed to us cannot by law be used for any other purposes save that of the recovery of victims. The remains recovered cannot be used for forensic examination save that of identifying them. DNA examination plays a key part in that role. We cannot pass on the information we have to any other organisation for any purpose. We might ask the law enforcement agencies from time to time to provide information to us but this is not a reciprocal arrangement where we can pass information back to them and they understand and agree to those conditions.
The commission operated in a form of reactive phase in the early years sitting there as an organisation and waiting for information to come in. A decision was taken in 2005 to go on the offensive and, in 2006, a small team was established to carry this work forward. The team comprises senior investigators; forensic archaeologists; geophysicists; imagery analysts; canine search or body detection dogs as they are often described - these dogs are trained to detect the smell of decay; forensic science provision in terms of DNA - it is high end DNA because of the cases we are looking at; civil engineering contractors, which takes up the lion's share of spending - members will see shortly from the images I will show the scale of the work that has to be done to drain sites and then to search; and family and press liaison. I hope the families would agree the relationship the commission team has with them is warm and effective. Our bottom line is that families will never hear anything second-hand. If there are developments or if searches are going to take place, we always make sure they find out first.
There is a great deal of debate about how the list was developed and who is on it. One can look at different documents in the press and so on and the list varies slightly but this is our list that we are looking at at the present time. The current unsolved cases are Joe Lynskey, Seamus Wright and Kevin McKee, Columba McVeigh, Robert Nairac, Brendan Megraw and Seamus Ruddy. They are in date order in the document circulated to members. Since the commission was established, other than one other case resolved in 1984, a number of victims have been recovered and repatriated to their respective families. I will not go through the list because of the time constraints we are operating under. The commission team adopts a sequential approach to its operation by first and foremost obtaining familial DNA from the closest surviving biological relatives. We have our own absolutely secure and private database, which only contains family DNA samples. Of course, when victims are recovered those samples from the victims are compared with the details held on the database. We start with background research, effectively a form of cold case review, liaison with various relevant organisations and institutions, and then looking at the site itself, developing or putting together a site history and survey.
We move from non-invasive processes all the way down the line gradually to invasive processes because once we have damaged a site and invaded a site one can never put it back to the way it was. It is crucial that we start with the non-invasive processes and gradually proceed along those lines. The first one will be developing or putting together a site history, field walking, looking at physical differences in the terrain; if there is different, unusual or alien vegetation; and if there any gullies, dips or changes in the land that might be of relevance or significance. Obviously we try to find potential witnesses - people who may have worked the land, operated in that land, know the land or perhaps owned the land at the material time. That is a very important process in itself.
Site preparation follows. A few months ago I said the biggest issue we always have and the highest cost is civil engineering. Virtually all the sites in which we operate are peat bogs and the first job is to drain them so we can undertake our work there. That takes a long time and it is a very complex process in terms of getting permissions from the various landowners and so forth. It is a lengthy and expensive process.
That is followed by measuring, gridding and recording the ground in which we are interested, and undertaking a geophysical survey. This is a non-invasive survey using various techniques and I will show some pictures of that. Canine search follows using detection dogs to see what they can find for us. Then we overlay the results of all these various techniques onto one master plan so we can get a better picture of what we are looking at. Last but not least of course is physical excavation - not to put too fine a point on it, digging the ground up and seeing what we can find.
In terms of historical imagery I have two slides. One shows how a particular site appeared at the time of the event and the following one shows how it appears today. It is interesting in terms of the contrast that can be seen. This is a peat bog and the little troughs and undulations that are visible are where the peat has been harvested over a period of time. In the top right some unclear terrain can be seen. That is actually a conifer plantation and that is how it appeared at the time this event occurred. The next slide shows how the little conifer plantation appears today. They are enormous trees, probably 25 m or 30 m tall. We have the distinct impression that what we are seeking may well be inside that tree line. Members can imagine what an enormous task that will be in terms of searching and recovery.
Everything we do is recorded and this slide shows yet another one of our sites. It can be seen that it has been measured and gridded. We divide all our sites into 20 m by 20 m grids. We can superimpose on those master plans any processes we undertake and any anomalies we come across. I inserted the slide to illustrate yet another problem we face. This is a piece of coastline with sand dunes in the top centre of the picture and the sea at the top right. It transpired that when an event occurred at this site the coastline looked very much as it does today in this picture, but in the intervening period the margins of land and sea moved dramatically. We had major headaches and concerns that the grave we were seeking might have been damaged, compromised or completely destroyed by tidal erosion in the intervening period. When we found this grave we found that it had been damaged and compromised by tidal action, but fortunately that was only to a very minor degree and we were able to recover the individual concerned and repatriate him.
I will run through the techniques we use from non-invasive to invasive. The slide shows one of our sites where we have a line search of archaeologists literally walking through the site to see if there is anything unusual which does not fit the natural background.
I also mentioned the problems we have with drainage. I am showing a picture of a site that illustrates that problem dramatically. The peat bog concerned was heavily flooded when we first arrived at it and the landowners told us it would probably clear in the summer so we waited until the summer but it did not clear. We ended up having to clean out two miles of drain and members can imagine the problems that entailed in terms of getting onto people's land to undertake that process and making the land and drain safe afterwards. It was an enormous and very costly task, but we eventually cleared the bog concerned and found the victim we sought. However, it took many months of hard work and civil engineering to achieve that goal. The picture shows the peat bog and the drainage ditch we installed. When we first came across this site it was one foot deep in water and now members can see that the water level has dropped by quite a few centimetres enabling us to work. It is still very unstable at that stage and the engineering and excavation is still a very complex task. We have to use light weight wide-track excavators that work on steel mats. They will be standing on a mat and when they want to move they need to move another steel mat forward and move on to that right across the bog. So it is a very slow and laborious process that requires considerable expertise.
The next picture shows the site concerned. In the centre one can see our excavation taking place. However, previously that entire area was a foot deep in water. It really is a major process. It sits in a natural basin effectively, so every time we have a bout of heavy rainfall it fills with water again and it has to be pumped out.
The next slide shows how the non-invasive technique starts. Our first job is to get our people onto the ground to grid it and measure it. Obviously we use the most modern techniques we possibly can to undertake that process. The next slide shows the end result. Those are all 20 m by 20 m grids that have all been worked on in one form or another.
This is the sort of information that our specialist surveyors are able to present to us at the end of this process using an IT package to reconstruct the ground about which we are talking. This one was quite interesting inasmuch as we received information to suggest that a victim was buried in this particular piece of ground. It transpired that it was an old quarry - probably 100 years old. We were able to eliminate it because of the nature of the terrain.
The first of the non-invasive techniques is magnetometry, the second is resistivity and the third is ground penetrating radar. These are all techniques not to find victims or bodies, but processes that throw up anomalies under the ground. As I stated, we overlay these different processes, one on top of the other, to see whether the sum total gives a good hint as to where to look first. They do not always work, but if they do and they are effective it short-circuits the process enormously and saves a great deal of money also.
This picture is of another lovely summer day in County Monaghan - I am not joking, it actually was a summer day. One can see the conditions in which our people must operate. We have cleared the peat away and beneath it is a level of clay. We know from the information we received this victim was buried in clay so the area is of enormous interest to us.
The third process is ground penetrating radar. This is a relatively recent invention developed by various technical boffins, primarily to locate non-metalic ordinance such as non-metalic mines. Throughout the world the military uses ground penetrating radar. An interesting application of it is in forensic archaeology, and in archaeology more generally. It can be very effective but this depends absolutely on the ground on which we operate. Sand can be a very good medium in which to operate where it is very effective. However, it does not work at all on sand full of sea water. These are the types of dilemma we have. All of the information we obtain is fed into various IT systems and then interpreted by geophysicists who are well qualified in interpreting various techniques and putting them together.
We spoke about cadaver dogs which are trained in the detection of human remains. While this process does not appear very technical, it is very precise and very clear. It cannot be seen very well on this slide but the individual in the picture is working in a 20 m by 20 m grid. He will put lines across every meter or half meter and use a boring tool to make a hole in the ground at every meter or half meter along each line. The dog will then walk along the line and is trained to detect scent coming up from the holes made by the probe. It is a very slow process but very meticulous. Detection dogs are wonderful in terms of recent burials but we are operating on the limits in terms of the length of time since burial. It is stating the obvious to say the dogs react to the scent of decay and once soft tissue has gone this process either slows or comes to a halt.
The final part of the process is physical excavation. In this picture one can see one of the sites we looked at earlier. There are drainage ditches to the left and right and one can also see the lightweight wide-tracked excavator operating on a steel mat very slowly taking away section by section a few centimetres bucket by bucket. At the side of the picture are two forensic archaeologists overseeing the entire process. Not only is the process of excavation overseen but the spoil is also examined. It does not look very high tech but believe me it is and it works very well. The excavator operators become very proficient in the work and because they are that bit higher they can be the first to see anomalies and they shout when they do so.
This picture shows what we look for in an ideal world: the peat surface can be seen at the top, right and bottom of the picture, and in the middle of the picture the layer of blue clay which sits underneath the peat can be seen. It is clear to the naked eye there has been some type of incursion through the blue clay which looks broadly to measure 1 m by 2 m. I must state we got very excited when we found this. Sadly it transpired it had been caused years ago by an excavator, probably with a very broad bucket. Our hopes were dashed unfortunately.
This slide shows the type of information provided by our geophysicists. There is a heat map in which information from the various geophysical processes is overlaid onto the map and analysed as exciting or not very exciting in various colours. I ask committee members to forgive me for rushing through my presentation but I am conscious of time.
The next slide is included to illustrate yet another dilemma we have. Most observers would expect if we were looking for a body buried 30 or 40 years ago we would be looking for a white boned skeleton. This could not be further from the truth or the fact. This slide shows a dog's skull we came across during one of our searches. The bone has been stained by the peat. We end up looking for brown remains - if this is not being too brutal - in a brown background. It is a very difficult process and must be done with consummate care.
I have included the next slide to give committee members an idea of the type of locations in which we operate. They are miles away from civilisation in terms of the resources we can bring to bear. They are often very remote and it is always a problem to get resources and heavy equipment to the sites.
The next slide is included to illustrate how effective the mechanical process can be. Many archaeologists would state one could not begin to look at an archaeological site using JCBs. I have included this slide to show how effective it can be. I do not know whether it is particularly clear, but the archaeologist is highlighting a denim rivet or button we found. This is one of the sites in which we recovered one of the victims. The evidence was found as part of the mechanical process, which progresses very slowly, very cautiously and very meticulously.
The next picture shows another site and one can see the marks of the excavator's bucket on the ground. The supervising archaeologist has called a halt to the work because something has been found. Again, this turned out to be one of the victims whom we were able to recover and return to the family.
In every case so far, the body recovered has been largely or completely skeletonised. Therefore, we rely very heavily on DNA processes to establish identity. I must stress these are high-end DNA processes which use new technologies. Remarkably, the clothing of most of the victims we have recovered has been in fantastic condition. This slide shows the clothing we recovered from one of the victims. Family members were able to identify the clothing and state it had been worn by their loved one when he disappeared, and confirm the DNA information we had.
We receive many reports of various sightings of disturbance of soil. This picture shows one in a graveyard. The easiest way to eliminate them is to send in an archaeologist to have a quick look, which is what this picture shows happening. Sometimes the sites can be eliminated in a matter of a half an hour or an hour. I must state that as a policy we do not wear forensic suits and this is for a very good reason. We do not want people to believe we are undertaking an investigative process when we recover victims. We make a point of wearing our ordinary site clothing, as it were, so no suggestions can be made that we are preserving recovered remains for forensic examination other than DNA examination to establish identities.
We receive many reports of missing persons and must make it clear that the commission is not a missing persons bureau. However, when we receive reports, we go to considerable lengths to ensure we put the people contacting us in touch with the appropriate authorities.
As our commissioners have stated, our activity is not currently time-limited. Once we have finished the active phase, the structure will remain in place sine die. The hot topic at the moment is the future security of Independent Commission for the Location of Victims’ Remains, ICLVR, records. I have no doubt that this has been brought about by the recent activity in connection with the Boston College archives. We want to make it crystal clear that the commission’s records will always be retained by the commission and will never be passed on to any other body or organisation. They are safe and secure for the future.
We anticipate - the two Governments have agreed - that the structures will remain in place to receive, pursue and investigate information and, where appropriate, to conduct further searches. We have had interesting and informative discussions with the International Red Cross, which is interested in what we are doing and the unique structure we have developed - the Ireland model. None of us would be surprised if the Ireland model was adopted in other jurisdictions.
