Tribunals of Inquiry: Motion.

Mr. J. Walsh

I move:

That Seanad Éireann:

—noting that following agreement reached between the British and Irish Governments at Weston Park in 2001, retired Canadian Supreme Court Judge Mr. Peter Cory was appointed to undertake a thorough investigation of allegations of collusion between British and Irish security forces and paramilitaries in six incidents;

—noting that the aim of this process was to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of collusion between State security forces and those responsible for the killings in each case to warrant a public inquiry;

—noting that, as part of the Weston Park agreement, the two Governments committed themselves that in the event that a public inquiry is recommended in any case, the relevant Government will implement that recommendation;

—noting that having completed his investigation into the murder of Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Robert Buchanan, both of the Royal Ulster Constabulary RUC, Mr. Peter Cory concluded that evidence was revealed that, if accepted, could be found to constitute collusion;

—mindful that certain incidents from the past in Northern Ireland giving rise to serious allegations of collusion by security forces in each jurisdiction remain a source of grave public concern;

resolves that it is expedient that a tribunal established under the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts 1921 to 2002 to inquire into the following definite matter of urgent public importance:

—Suggestions that members of the Garda Síochána or other employees of the State colluded in the fatal shootings of RUC Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and RUC Superintendent Robert Buchanan on 20 March 1989;

and to report to the Clerk of Dáil Éireann and to make such findings and recommendations as it sees fit in relation to these matters;

and further resolves that:

(I) the tribunal shall report to the Clerk of the Dáil on an interim basis not later than three months from the date of establishment of the tribunal and as soon as may be after the tenth day of any oral hearings of the tribunal on the following matters:

(a) the number of parties granted representation by the tribunal,

(b) the progress which will then have been made in the hearings and work of the tribunal,

(d) any other matters that the tribunal considers should be drawn to the attention of the Houses of the Oireachtas at the time of the report, including any matters relating to its terms of reference;

(II) if the tribunal finds that there is insufficient co-operation from a person(s) not compellable to give evidence pursuant to the provisions of the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts 1921 to 2002, to report that fact to the Clerk of the Dáil, including the steps taken by the tribunal to obtain the co-operation of that person(s), for consideration by the Houses of the Oireachtas, in conjunction with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, having regard to the public interest; and

(III) the inquiry shall be completed in as economical a manner as possible and at the earliest possible date consistent with a fair examination of the matters referred to it.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. M. McDowell)

I am pleased to have the opportunity to table this motion seeking the establishment of a tribunal of inquiry into suggestions of collusion in the brutal and callous murders of RUC Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and RUC Superintendent Bob Buchanan by the Provisional IRA in 1989.

The background to this motion originates as far back as August 2001 when, following discussions with the Northern Ireland parties at Weston Park, the Irish and British Governments committed themselves to the appointment of a judge of international standing from outside both jurisdictions to undertake a thorough investigation of allegations of collusion between British and Irish security forces and paramilitaries in six cases.

The six cases are the murders of Mr. Pat Finucane, a solicitor, Mr. Robert Hamill, Ms Rosemary Nelson, a solicitor, Mr. Billy Wright, the two RUC officers and Northern Ireland Lord Justice Maurice Gibson and Lady Cecily Gibson. The first four of these cases relate to allegations of collusion by British security forces while the latter two cases relate to allegations of collusion by the Garda.

Arising from the Weston Park agreement, Mr. Peter Cory, an eminent retired Canadian Supreme Court judge, was asked by the two Governments to investigate and report on the allegations of collusion. Judge Cory was appointed by the Governments in May 2002.

The aim of the inquiry process under Judge Cory was to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of collusion between State security forces and those responsible for the killings in each case to warrant a public inquiry. The resultant reports into the six cases were submitted to the Governments by Judge Cory in October 2003. On behalf of the Government, I thank and commend Judge Cory once again for his diligent and painstaking work in producing these reports.

In December 2003, following Government approval, I published redacted versions of the two reports to the Government. All the redactions to the two reports were performed with the explicit consent and approval of Judge Cory and occurred solely on the basis of the Government's obligations to ensure unprejudiced justice.

The two reports make grim reading for anyone with even an ounce of humanity. Both Lord Justice and Lady Gibson were cruelly killed in a carefully planned and executed bombing attack on the morning of 25 April 1987. The south Armagh brigade of the Provisional IRA claimed responsibility for the killings. The IRA also issued other public statements indicating that the murders had been planned in advance.

Deputy Glennon spoke of some of the collateral damage caused by that explosion to friends of his coming to Dublin to play rugby that day in preparation for the World Cup and they had an horrific tale to tell.

Suggestions of collusion related to claims that a member or members of the Garda advised those directly responsible for the killings or members of their organisation of the Gibsons' itinerary on that fateful day. However, Judge Cory concluded in his report on this appalling crime that there is no evidence of collusion by the Garda or other Government agency that would warrant the holding of an inquiry. I welcome this finding in that it removes doubt or suspicion that a member or members of the Garda committed a gross act of treachery in colluding in the murder of two innocents. However, I fully realise that is cold comfort to the victims' families.

The other case relevant to this jurisdiction examined by Judge Cory is different, but involved an equally horrific act of callous murder. While I appreciate that the detail I am about to relate concerning this appalling act of savagery is distressing, it is worth recalling, if only to demonstrate the depravity of those who perpetrated it.

On the afternoon of 20 March 1989, Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Bob Buchanan were shot dead in an ambush just north of the Border as they returned from a prearranged meeting with a senior Garda officer in Dundalk Garda station. The Provisional IRA subsequently claimed responsibility for the double murder. This meeting was concerned with the mundane but important issue of co-operation to prevent cross-Border smuggling. The two RUC officers were wholly unarmed and had to be so at the time.

The location of the ambush, on the Edenappa Road, was found by Judge Cory to have been well chosen in terms of topography and tree cover with respect to a nearby British army observation post. The ambush involved PIRA members establishing a checkpoint on the road only minutes before the arrival of Superintendent Buchanan's private car carrying the two RUC officers. The two officers were unarmed.

From the available information, it appears that two armed men, dressed in army style fatigues and with camouflage on their faces, stopped southbound cars and strategically placed them so as to funnel northbound traffic into a single lane. Shortly after the last southbound vehicle was stopped and in place, Superintendent Buchanan's car appeared, driving northwards. It was also flagged down by the armed men in the middle of the road. As the car slowed, a van, which had been following, overtook Superintendent Buchanan's car and pulled into a nearby laneway. Four armed men, wearing camouflage and balaclavas, emerged from the van and started firing immediately. Superintendent Buchanan attempted to reverse his car to escape but the car apparently stalled and he was unsuccessful.

Both Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Bob Buchanan, while still in the car, were hit several times by a hail of bullets. Examination of the vehicle the following day indicated no less than 25 strike marks from bullets along both sides of the car, with the majority aimed at the driver's side. The autopsy performed on Superintendent Buchanan revealed that he had suffered many fragment wounds in the head and upper body, and it is probable that he was dead by the time his car came to a halt. He had also been shot in the head at close range, almost certainly after he had died.

Chief Superintendent Breen had been wounded in the abdomen, the upper right shoulder and the arm, and had sustained wounds to his head. It appears that he had left the car after it came to a stop, waving a white handkerchief. It was obvious that he had suffered several gunshot wounds before he left the car which, although severe, did not appear to be fatal. Eyewitness accounts indicated that a member of the Provisional IRA murder squad walked up to him and shot him in the back of the head. It is worth restating that these were two unarmed RUC officers returning from a meeting with their colleagues in the Garda Síochána. They were two policemen doing their duty.

That, then, is the appalling scene which Judge Cory paints of the last moments of these two men's lives. As he says himself in his report, those shootings were brutal, cowardly and demonstrated a callous insensitivity to both the suffering of individuals, their relatives and to life itself. In the course of the proceedings in the Dáil yesterday, Deputy Jim O'Keeffe drew to my attention that immediately after this event the Provisional IRA issued an account in which it claimed that the two policemen had come on a group of IRA men and surprised them and they were fired on in self defence. One can see what credibility can be attached to some of the statements coming from that organisation, even that far back.

I now turn to suggestions of collusion. These relate to claims that a member of the Garda Síochána, or a civilian employed within the Garda, advised either those directly responsible for the killings or members of their organisation of the visit of the two RUC officers and, in particular, of the time they left Dundalk Garda station. In his report, Judge Cory examined the known circumstances, the intelligence reports and other matters in drawing conclusions about the case. From a review of the relevant factors, Judge Cory stated that it might be said that the Provisional IRA did not need any assistance from within the Garda to carry out the ambush. Moreover, Judge Cory suggests that the intelligence reports received shortly after the murders, considered by themselves, might be thought to point to a similar conclusion.

However, Judge Cory considered that a statement made by Kevin Fulton, which is a code name for a British army informer, could be found to constitute evidence of collusion on the part of a Garda officer, referred to as Garda B in the report. Kevin Fulton is the pseudonym of a former agent with a British intelligence agency who, in that capacity, is supposed to have become a member of the Provisional IRA. In a statement delivered to Judge Cory, Kevin Fulton claims that on the day of the ambush of the two RUC officers, his senior IRA commander was told by another member of the IRA that Garda B had informed the Provisional IRA that the two officers were at Dundalk Garda station.

Judge Cory goes on to state that this statement would add credence to two intelligence reports which spoke of a Garda leak. In all this, it should be noted that Judge Cory does not make findings of fact. Rather, he states that if that evidence were accepted by those eventually making the findings of fact, it could be found to constitute collusion. Accordingly, on that basis, Judge Cory concluded that there must be a public inquiry in this case.

As part of the Weston Park agreement, the two Governments gave a commitment that, in the event that a public inquiry is recommended in any case, the relevant Government will implement that recommendation. Accordingly, the Government is committed to holding a public inquiry in respect of allegations of Garda collusion in the killings of the two RUC officers. In light of Judge Cory's recommendations, I secured Government approval to hold a public inquiry into the murders, to take the form of a tribunal of inquiry pursuant to the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts 1921 to 2002. I sought that type of public inquiry because it meets all the essential criteria set down by Judge Cory for a public inquiry. I subsequently secured the authorisation of the Government to lay the necessary resolutions before both Houses of the Oireachtas to enable the establishment of the tribunal of inquiry, according to the formulation contained in the motion before the House, which constitutes the tribunal's terms of reference.

I briefly draw the House's attention to some of the more important aspects of the terms of reference. After a straightforward recitation, the main operative section is, of course, that a tribunal shall be established to inquire into suggestions that members of the Garda Síochána or other employees of the State colluded in the fatal shootings of RUC Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and RUC Superintendent Robert Buchanan on 20 March 1989. By any stretch of the imagination, this is the broadest possible interpretation of the findings of the relevant Cory report, and it delimits in no way whatsoever the tribunal's latitude to inquire into whatever organisations and individuals it sees fit.

The other notable feature of the terms of reference is paragraph (II), which states that if the tribunal finds that there is insufficient co-operation from any person not compellable to give evidence, that fact should be reported to the Clerk of the Dáil for consideration by the Houses of the Oireachtas, in conjunction with myself, having regard to the public interest. The thinking here is simple. It is a fact that likely key witnesses reside outside the jurisdiction. As with domestic legislation in general, the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Acts 1921 to 2002 apply only within this jurisdiction. Hence, the statutory provisions relating to compellability to give evidence would not apply to likely key witnesses. Accordingly, it is anticipated that the tribunal of inquiry would be obliged to rely on the goodwill and co-operation of non-compellable persons to make progress with aspects of its work. Paragraph (II) of the terms of reference provides a mechanism by which the tribunal can report back to the Houses of the Oireachtas should non-compellable persons decline to co-operate with it.

That is an important element of the terms of reference of the tribunal. In the normal course of events, if co-operation from outside the jurisdiction necessary for the tribunal to complete its work was not forthcoming, we would be left with the prospect of the tribunal reporting in an incomplete way. By virtue of this provision, the tribunal can report that fact to the Government. By that means, the problem of securing co-operation from non-compellable persons can be elevated to the political sphere, where I, the Government and the Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas can determine the best way forward. In particular, it provides an opportunity for formal approaches to be made to the British Government, should the need arise, to seek to secure the co-operation of persons residing in either Britain or Northern Ireland, whether they be British citizens or otherwise. It provides a form of political leverage, grounded in the restated will of the Oireachtas, that can be used, should the need arise, to ensure the tribunal is given every opportunity to secure the co-operation of all those who might be able to shed light on this appalling act of barbarism.

The House will be aware that the sole member of the tribunal of inquiry will be the current President of the District Court, Judge Peter Smithwick. I am confident that Judge Smithwick, based on his long and distinguished career as a solicitor and a judge, will conduct this inquiry with all due diligence and with the professionalism that is the hallmark of the Judiciary. Given the onerous nature of a tribunal of this kind, Judge Smithwick has indicated that he proposes to tender his resignation as President of the District Court, he is ex officio a judge of the Circuit Court, and to concentrate full time on this activity.

I know this House will join with me in advising everyone involved to co-operate fully with the tribunal. I have full confidence that the Garda Síochána, as well as any other institution of the State, will be forthcoming in its engagement with the tribunal. Nothing less than full co-operation is demanded, and nothing less should be expected from the guardians of the State.

There is, however, one organisation that could provide full answers to the tribunal, and that, of course, is the IRA. I challenge that organisation, and I challenge its political alter ego, Sinn Féin, to offer and ensure that co-operation to the tribunal. Sinn Féin and the IRA cannot have it both ways. They cannot clamour for justice and truth in regard to other barbaric acts, which are among the list of acts mentioned earlier and considered by Judge Cory, and stay silent on this one. If Sinn Féin and the IRA want to convince the Irish people, North and South, that they have truly taken the democratic path, this tribunal offers them one opportunity to demonstrate that fact.

This tribunal is being established by the will of the people assembled here in the Houses of the Oireachtas and, I believe, would have the support of the great majority of people in Northern Ireland also. Sinn Féin and the IRA would do well to remember that fact because it is the will of the people that savage acts, such as the brutal murders of Chief Superintendent Breen and Superintendent Buchanan by the Provisional IRA in 1989, should have no place in this Republic.

Pursuant to the Weston Park agreement, the State is under a political and moral obligation to establish a public inquiry into the brutal murders of these two RUC officers. We do so, not just out of those obligations imposed on us by acceptance of Judge Cory's report but out of a genuine desire to see justice done in the form of ascertaining the truth. I believe that the form of public inquiry proposed and its proposed terms of reference constitute the most open, expansive and powerful form of inquiry available here or anywhere else to ensure that the full truth emerges.

I considered whether the commissions of inquiry legislation which I brought through the Houses would be adequate. Section 8 of that Act urges a commissioner appointed under it to have as much of the proceedings as possible held in private whereas Judge Cory made the exact opposite recommendation which was that, in so far as can be, everything should be done in public.

The issue of cost arose in the Lower House. For the guidance of Senators, it was generally accepted that this should be a time-limited and economic tribunal of inquiry, given that the full panoply of inquisitive procedures under those Acts was being used to arrive at the truth. Last year, the Government adopted guidelines for the payment of counsel in tribunals. Instead of the extremely large amounts that were being paid on a per diem basis to counsel, it has been decided that the fees should be structured in such a way that no senior counsel’s remuneration should exceed the annual salary of a High Court judge. I intend to inform the sole member of this tribunal that this is the ball park in which he must play.

Judge Cory said the tribunal was to be free to select its own counsel. Deputy Jim O'Keeffe persuaded me, in the context of the debate on the Commissions of Investigation Bill, to introduce the concept of counsel tendering for work. Since Judge Cory said that the tribunal must be free to select its own counsel, I am not in a position to impose my tendering process on the sole member.

We owe it to the families left behind, the people of Northern Ireland and the people of this jurisdiction, given the concerns raised about the organ of the State, to put in place an inquiry of this kind. I did not read out the names — these were contained on the list given to Judge Peter Cory — of the persons whose killings were the subject of the first four inquiries. However, I wish to pay my respects to them now. The people to whom I refer, Pat Finucane, Robert Hamill, Rosemary Nelson and Billy Wright, were the subjects of cruel killings. The barbarity of the offence that will be investigated by the inquiry under discussion was matched by that which occurred in these other cases. In that context, one need only consider the killing of Pat Finucane in front of his family, the blowing-up of Rosemary Nelson, the kicking to death of Robert Hamill in horrendous circumstances with which I became closely acquainted when I served as Attorney General and the circumstances in which Billy Wright was killed. Regardless of the identities of the victims, the families should not be placed in some hierarchy of sympathy. Everybody is equally entitled to whatever rights can be vindicated under the Constitution and to the greatest extent possible, by an inquiry of this kind.

Mr. Cummins

I welcome the Minister. Fine Gael welcomes the establishment of this inquiry into the murders of RUC Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and RUC Superintendent Robert Buchanan by the Provisional IRA. I remember reading in The Irish Times four years ago that this inquiry was to be set up and Fine Gael is pleased that it has finally been established.

The two officers were a great loss to their police force and their deaths marked a blow to the growing co-operation between the then RUC and the Garda Síochána. They were also a great loss to their families, friends and communities. Some criticism of the actions and practices of the RUC at the time was probably necessary but the courage and dedication of these two gentlemen and the members of that force can never be questioned.

The work of any police force is of fundamental importance to its community and country and members of the police must serve as role models for all. They must stand as examples of discipline, courage and fairness. Good police officers deserve the support, recognition and admiration of their communities. In the period from 1969 to 1999, over 300 members of the RUC and the RUC Reserve lost their lives. The murder of such men was a blow to the policing communities, to the residents of Northern Ireland, to all who believe in a democratic society and to those who understand the importance of the role of a police force in such a society.

I will not repeat the details of the ambush as the Minister has already outlined them. However, it is important to bear in mind that these unarmed men were returning from a meeting at Dundalk Garda station. They were doing so as part of the normal co-operation that took place at the time between both police forces in combatting the criminal activity and smuggling which, unfortunately, is still being carried out on this island by these murderous and criminal gangs. These were two brave men who travelled unarmed as part of their duties. People in this jurisdiction should be aware of that fact. They were set upon by a gang of murderous thugs who brutally murdered them. The Minister has outlined the sequence of events. One of the men got out of the car after he had been shot and waved a white handkerchief but an IRA thug shot him in the back of the head. This is the type of murder that was perpetrated by those on all sides of the conflict during those times.

It should also be borne in mind that Chief Superintendent Breen and Superintendent Buchanan left widows and children. People should take account of the suffering inflicted on those two families as a consequence of this murderous act. It also brings to mind the suffering of the widow of Detective Garda Jerry McCabe, who was also murdered by these thugs and criminals.

Section 2.30 of the Cory report deals with Chief Superintendent Breen's comments to his staff officer, Sergeant Mains, to the effect that he was uneasy about going to Dundalk. He believed that one of the officers stationed there had contact with a member of a notorious family from the area who was suspected of being a member of the Provisional IRA and of being involved in smuggling activities in the area. He believed the officer had passed information to him. He also believed that certain members of the Garda Síochána were in that person's pay. He named a particular garda. The Minister referred to the statement of Kevin Fulton which bears out that point. This tribunal will investigate further whether collusion occurred. We must ensure that what we are establishing does not degenerate into another cash cow for the Law Library set. There is no question about this. I do not think the public will tolerate it. I welcome the remarks on costs made by the Minister. What occurred in the past is not acceptable and it cannot be allowed to continue.

It is also important that the Minister spells out how the Government intends to address the issue of large payments. He already mentioned this issue today and he ought to expand on it later. Judge Cory's reported stated:

Time and costs can be reasonably controlled. For example, a maximum allowance could be set for counsel appearing for every party granted standing.

I am concerned about the terms of reference which require the inquiry to be completed in as economical a manner as possible. I do not think that is sufficient. We have not been given an estimate of the amount of time the tribunal's work will take. The work of other tribunals which were supposed to finish within 12 months continued for up to five years. That must be considered in this inquiry. We are fortunate that Judge Cory has completed a great deal of preliminary work to a high standard, for which I compliment him. The Cory report is a model which I would like to see followed when inquiries are conducted into certain matters in the future.

The Minister alluded to the matter of co-operation by all parties in this process. That is essential. However, I do not have confidence that Sinn Féin and its masters in the Provisional IRA will co-operate with this inquiry. It will probably be a situation similar to the graffiti on the walls of the Short Strand which states: "Whatever you say, say nothing." As the murder of Mr. Robert McCartney demonstrates, the Provisional IRA and Sinn Féin speak fine words but action seems to be missing in many cases. I hope that in this case they put their money where their mouths are and co-operate in a meaningful way with this tribunal but I have serious doubts about that.

I conclude by quoting from the Cory report which was quoted earlier by the Minister. It states, "These shootings were brutal, cowardly, and demonstrate a callous insensitivity to both the suffering of individuals and to life itself." I add democracy to this list. We must ensure that this tribunal is sharp, short and focused and I trust the Minister will ensure this will be the case.

Mr. J. Walsh

Ba maith liom fáilte a chur roimh an Aire go dtí an Teach seo. In proposing the motion I am mindful that the British and Irish Governments in coming to an agreement in Weston Park appointed a man of international stature in retired Canadian judge, Peter Cory. This was a recognition of the need to address the legacy of the conflict over the past 30 years and, in particular, to examine cases causing public concern, where allegations of collusion were in the public arena for quite some time.

As the Minister noted, the Cory inquiry specifically dealt with six cases, namely, the murder of Mr. Pat Finucane in front of his family; the murder of Mr. Robert Hamill who was kicked to death in Portadown with two RUC members sitting in a car as spectators to the event; the blowing up of Ms Rosemary Nelson who was a human rights lawyer; the murder by the INLA in the Maze Prison of Mr. Billy Wright who, despite his dubious record, was not entitled to be killed in cold blood; the bombing which killed Lord Justice Gibson and his wife, who were travelling north from Rosslare on their return from holidays when they were murdered; and the subject of the motion before the House today which is the shooting of Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Robert Buchanan.

Despite allegations that may be made against any of those people everybody has an entitlement to life. No self-appointed group has the right to take it away and neither does this State. Judge Cory in his report to both Governments recommended public inquiries into the cases of five of the six murders that he considered, the exception being the killing of Lord Justice Gibson.

Some query why we are now proceeding with a public inquiry into this matter, particularly given the British Government's failure to fully honour its undertakings. I concur with the Government's decision on this matter. Ireland has a proud record internationally and it is essential that we are seen to fulfil our obligations under agreements that we freely enter into. We should do so regardless of fear for the outcome and in a very open and transparent manner. I welcome the Minister doing so in the form of a public inquiry, which I think a more suitable vehicle for this matter than a commission of investigation. However, I do not doubt that such commissions will serve us well in other areas in the future. The Minister deserves our compliments for his actions.

It is worth noting that in the case which is the subject of this motion, Judge Cory did not find evidence but did hear allegations of collusion. It is unfortunate that the stand taken by the Government contrasts starkly with the British Government's failure to respond, particularly in the Pat Finucane case. The British Government initially failed to issue the report on Mr. Finucane and it required a statement from Judge Cory to subsequently set the public record straight. I acknowledge that the British Government is now establishing public inquiries in accordance with the recommendations of Judge Cory into the murders of Ms Nelson, Mr. Wright and Mr. Hamill. However, it is not doing so in the case of Mr. Finucane despite its acceptance of the Weston Park agreement. Article 19 of that agreement states:

If the appointed judge considers that in any case this has not provided a sufficient basis on which to establish the facts, he or she can report to this effect with recommendations as to what further action should be taken. In the event that a Public Inquiry is recommended in any case, the relevant Government will implement that recommendation.

That is a clear and unambiguous undertaking and one which we are giving effect to today. The same should occur in the case of Mr. Finucane.

There is strong suspicion that the legislation before the House of Commons providing for ministerial powers to withhold information from public inquiries may have been motivated by the potential for embarrassment arising from a public inquiry into the Pat Finucane case. This is a serious breach of the Weston Park agreement and it could be argued that it flies in the face of the undertakings given in the Good Friday Agreement. The section of that Agreement dealing with reconciliation and victims of violence states, "The participants believe that it is essential to acknowledge and address the suffering of the victims of violence as a necessary element of reconciliation."

Unfortunately this has not been our experience not only in the case of Mr. Finucane but also in the inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings established by this House. After thorough examination by Mr. Justice Barron and public hearings by the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, recommendations were made.

The British Government notified the Taoiseach in January of its refusal to establish a Cory-type inquiry, which was called for in the first instance because of allegations of collusion in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. I am reminded of a comment made at those public hearings by an eminent former public servant, Mr. Seán Donlon, who was Secretary General of the Department of Foreign Affairs. He stated that if the British Government had something to conceal in any documents then obviously it would be unlikely to co-operate with an inquiry.

It emerged last month during the course of the examination of Mr. Justice Barron's report of the Dublin bombing in 1972-73 that a British citizen, Martin Douglas, had made representations through his MP to the British Prime Minister. The Prime Minister wrote back to him stating:

The Government is aware of the continuing hurt that Mr. Douglas and others feel about the number of unresolved deaths that took place as a result of the conflict in Northern Ireland. It is entirely understandable that those who have suffered the loss of loved ones still yearn to find out what happened, and the British Government is committed to doing what it can to give those people the best chance of achieving that.

That letter was dated 10 January 2005. On 1 February the sub-committee received a letter from the Northern Ireland Secretary of State, who is a member of the British Cabinet. He stated:

It was our judgement at the time of Justice Barron's approach regarding the Dublin bombings of 1972 and 1973 that we were not able to begin the further major and time-consuming search through the records of various departments which would be necessary to assemble the material. I fear that there is therefore nothing I could usefully add, either in writing or orally before your sub-committee, on this question.

Mr. Seán Donlon, who would have some knowledge and experience of filing and document retrieval systems, stated that all of the documents that would have been of help to us and Mr. Justice Barron, which were not made available, would have been processed as part of the requirements for the release of public documents under the 30-year rule for the National Archives. That raises serious questions about doing business with the British Government and its trustworthiness.

The Finucane case is a serious breach of the Weston Park agreement and the failure to co-operate with a duly established committee of this House is a breach of the Good Friday Agreement. Unfortunately this type of response gives fodder to the recruitment of people by paramilitary organisations. Our history is littered with such examples and this is my biggest regret in this regard.

I agree with the Minister that people cannot dine à la carte. In a clear message to Sinn Féin and the IRA he stated that they must be seen to co-operate with this inquiry. I hope they will do so. If they do, it will help strengthen the case to put pressure on the British Government, which cannot dine à la carte either.

I welcome the motion and also its motivation and the manner in which it has been brought forward by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Government. I hope it will get to the truth of the matter. I also hope it will act as a catalyst to encourage the British Government to fulfil its obligations under these agreements. Otherwise, it will raise serious questions as to where we go from here in terms of the peace process and the Good Friday Agreement.

Mr. Kett

I welcome the Minister to the House. I thought he had fallen out with us as it is almost a week since he was here.

Ms White

We missed the Minister when we discussed child care recently.

Mr. M. McDowell

I was in Buenos Aires.

Mr. Kett

I am pleased to support the motion before the House. Under the Weston Park agreement we are obliged to hold a public inquiry into the brutal murders of RUC Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and RUC Superintendent Robert Buchanan, in accordance with the recommendations of Judge Cory.

We must honour this obligation in full and without reservation. In doing this we are also honouring the memory of these men, their bravery and their families. These were two men going about their lawful business, meeting their counterparts in Dundalk. It was the means by which they supported their families. They were making a positive contribution to what was a pitiful situation in the North of Ireland at that particular time. Their reward was to be shot like animals in cold blood in what appears to have been an entrapment situation.

Senator Cummins referred to the fact that many innocent people were killed during the 30 years between 1969 and 1999. As he outlined, over 300 RUC officers and RUC reserves were killed. It would appear that these two gentlemen were pillars within the policing community. One of them was highly decorated. It was a serious blow to the policing community when they were murdered. As the Minister stated, it was a serious blow to the people of Northern Ireland. It was also a serious blow to those of us who believe in democracy and the role police play in a democratic society in protecting us and our way of life.

In congratulating Judge Cory on his deliberations, it is regrettable that this is the only public inquiry that is currently on offer. The judge's findings in this case mean that if evidence revealed was accepted, it could be found to constitute collusion. We must be mindful that the good judge did not find that collusion had taken place, rather the nature of his investigation only allowed him to conclude that there was sufficient evidence to warrant a public inquiry. I am particularly pleased that a tribunal of inquiry has been instigated as it is the most expansive and open form of inquiry possible in this jurisdiction. Others would do well to heed our example.

I also commend the terms of reference of the tribunal which could not be more wide-ranging. The motion before us allows for the most searching and objective examination of all pertinent issues. That is to the Minister's credit. The tribunal's ultimate findings and conclusions will be welcomed, whether the outcome of the tribunal is positive or negative. In establishing this inquiry we are not just honouring our commitment under the Weston Park agreement, we are also committing ourselves to establishing the truth of the most serious allegation, which is that the State, or its employees, colluded in the murder of two RUC officers by the Provisional IRA.

I hope that arising from this inquiry, the British Government might take a leaf from our book and will support the fine work that was done by the sub-committee, of which Senator Jim Walsh was a member, which examined the reports on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and the Sackville Place bombings. Up to now the British Government has failed to support the sub-committee. A considerable number of people in this State were also murdered against a background of allegations of collusion by officers of the British Crown. The British Government would do well to take note of the Minister's actions here today.

It should also consider the case of Pat Finucane and seek justice for his wife and family, as Senator Jim Walsh pointed out. It should demonstrate goodwill and honour the commitment which we understand was also part of the Weston Park agreement. Of all the cases that were mentioned, the case of Pat Finucane probably involved the most collusion. All parties that espouse democracy and fair play now have an opportunity to honour their bona fides in this instance. They have a wonderful opportunity to bring information to the table, if they have it, and to get this tribunal off to a flying start. They should demonstrate their goodwill through actions rather than words.

The tribunal will afford an opportunity to remove any cloud that may be hanging over the Garda Síochána, particularly those gardaí who may be serving in Border regions and those who are still serving in the force who were involved at the time in question. If collusion is proven, the necessary action should be taken. Let the Government of this jurisdiction be seen to stand for justice for all. This is exactly what we are doing. We have a duty to ensure that the suggestions that have been made are fully investigated in an open and impartial manner in the interest of both the families and the State.

I was delighted to hear the Minister state he will be attaching a condition to the tribunal to limit its costs, in so far as this is possible without encroaching on its work. We already have ample evidence of the manner in which tribunals can get out of hand and become a severe burden on the State. I wish the Minister and those involved in the tribunal well in their deliberations.

Ms Tuffy

Let me refer to a paragraph 2.18 of the Cory report, which may have been quoted already in the House and which was quoted in the Dáil yesterday:

Chief Superintendent Breen and Superintendent Buchanan demonstrated all the finest attributes required of policemen. They were proven leaders in the police community and, by example, leaders in the greater community of Northern Ireland. To murder such men was a blow to their police communities, to the residents of Northern Ireland, to all who believe in a democratic society and to all who understand the important role of the police in a democratic society.

This point has not only been made by Judge Cory but also by everybody who has spoken on this issue. The two policemen were highly regarded and were role models for policemen North and South.

If one considers the types of meetings held between the Garda and the RUC, one will note they had very much become part of a routine, particularly those of Superintendent Buchanan. The meetings were designed to further co-operation. The report states there was not much security involved and that Superintendent Buchanan may have believed this would build up trust with the Garda and community in the South. This type of co-operation served as a precursor to the peace process and was also central thereto. It is very similar to the type of arrangement the Minister is trying to establish involving co-operation between the PSNI and the Garda Síochána. In this regard, one should bear in mind the implementation of the Patten recommendations and the great efforts made in building trust by all those responsible for policing in the North.

When we had our hearings on community policing some days ago, there were in attendance representatives from the European Confederation of Councillors, which includes councillors from the North and South. The councillor from the Progressive Unionist Party stated he had been very supportive of the work of the RUC and that the changes made to policing in the North had resulted in further improvement.

In light of the efforts that have been made, particularly by the PSNI, the tribunal under discussion is of great importance. There are two sides to the coin. On the one hand, we seek police forces, both North and South, that are trustworthy and accountable while, on the other hand, we must support our police service and ensure it is protected. There is a need to ensure the truth is told about the tragic murders of Chief Superintendent Breen and Superintendent Buchanan.

A number of Senators referred to the implementation of the other recommendations of the Cory report, including the holding of the inquiry into the death of Pat Finucane. My party leader, Deputy Rabbitte, referred to this yesterday. Making reference to the Weston Park negotiations, Judge Cory states the following in paragraph 2.167 of his report:

In light of this provision in the original agreement failure to hold such an inquiry as quickly as possible might be thought to be a denial of the original agreement, which appears to have been an important and integral part of the peace process. The failure to do so could be seen as a cynical breach of faith which could have unfortunate consequences for the Peace Accord.

This is why it is so important that we in the Republic honour our part of the agreement through the tribunal. Similarly, the British Government must honour its part. So far, it has not shown the same good faith in that regard. It is very important that we keep the pressure on it to ensure it delivers.

Senators have referred to the cost of tribunals and I support their comments. However, it is important that the tribunal in question be well-resourced from the outset and that it operate efficiently. We have considered the mistakes that have been made in respect of other tribunals and we must ensure that we learn from them when establishing new tribunals, including the one in question. Where costs are concerned, one must spend money at the outset, thereby saving money in the longer term. It is very important that tribunals be given the necessary resources to do their work. All tribunals should be monitored constantly in this regard to consider whether their terms of reference need to be changed and to ensure they are not being hindered in their work. I welcome the tribunal and the work of the Minister in bringing it forward.

Dr. Mansergh

I welcome the Minister and support the motion. Despite the present difficulties in the peace process, it is good to see the Irish Government carrying out one of its obligations under the Weston Park agreement. I was present at Weston Park as a member of the Irish delegation and remember being present at many of the discussions.

I think a concern for balance was at issue. It was felt that the three most serious cases of allegations concerning deaths of people from the Nationalist community should be balanced by similar treatment of cases involving people from the Unionist, or in one case loyalist, side. I am confident the Minister will ensure that both the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and all branches of the Garda will give their full and total co-operation to this inquiry and that nothing will be withheld on grounds of national security, which obviously can cover a multitude. I hope that as far as the State is concerned, this inquiry will prove to be a model of how a state should co-operate when there is a question of involvement of one of its servants in collusion and terrorism.

The Minister described in graphic detail the two murders that are the subject matter of the present inquiry. Although it is difficult to describe them as anything but murders, there has been some debate on this issue. Recently, I attended a debate organised by Sinn Féin about politics and criminality. I do not necessarily preclude an act, because it has been politically motivated, from being criminal and spent most of my time arguing and explaining that point. However, a particular dimension to the Breen and Buchanan murders is that they were in Dundalk at our invitation to co-operate on matters of mutual concern. Even in 1982, when political relations between the two Governments were extremely poor, co-operation continued because it was vital to the safety of the people of this State and of Northern Ireland.

At the Sinn Féin meeting I attended recently, I was asked what was the point of this inquiry given that the IRA had declared and accepted responsibility for the attack and consequently, there was no mystery as to who, in general terms, had carried it out. I replied that the issue was not who was responsible but whether there was collusion. Collusion, when it relates to Pat Finucane, Rosemary Nelson or others is an issue of major concern on which Gerry Adams and other republican leaders have been extremely vocal and eloquent over many years. However, I got the distinct impression that as far as the questioner was concerned, as this incident allegedly involved republicans and one of our security forces, this sort of collusion was scarcely worth an inquiry.

We must be absolutely rigorous. If we are demanding rigorous and searching inquiries into collusion between British or Northern Ireland security forces and loyalists in the carrying out or assisting in carrying out of acts of terrorism, we must be equally rigorous with allegations of collusion between the IRA and servants of this State. One cannot have a particular attitude to one occurrence and a different attitude to another.

Mr. Finucane

Hear, hear.

Dr. Mansergh

Perhaps in the past we were not always sufficiently rigorous in that regard.

As Senator Jim Walsh observed, Judge Cory, who carried out some excellent work, has expressed total dissatisfaction with the arrangements being made for the Finucane inquiry. Unfortunately, a pattern may be discerned. We have found it with the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1972 and 1974 and the Finucane and Nelson cases. I knew Rosemary Nelson and several months before she was blown up, she detailed some of the threats that had been made to an informal committee of the United States Congress. This response is not good enough from a democratic society.

From my observations, the British Government is enthralled to its security services. There is a history, particularly with British Labour Party Governments, of the security services taking some part in underground political opposition, possibly including collusion with the Opposition, to try to weaken and destabilise the Government. However, this is not a reason to be so enthralled and in a sense provides a greater incentive to investigate the issue. I find it unsatisfactory and objectionable that there are so many reserved areas and confused attitudes from a country that frequently holds itself up to the rest of the world as a model democracy. One hears similar sentiments from some Unionist spokespersons, who claim that the IRA committed so many murders that the Unionist community cannot stand many more inquiries of this kind. This point is made by representatives of a party led by a lawyer. One must be rigorous about this issue. Is state terrorism every bit as bad as paramilitary terrorism?

Ms White

Yes.

Mr. J. Walsh

It is worse.

Dr. Mansergh

It is at least as bad and one could argue that it is worse, in that it constitutes a betrayal of trust. I have great admiration for Balthasar Garzón, a Spanish judge. Admittedly, he operates under a system of law that the Minister does not wholly admire.

Ms White

He is a brave man.

Dr. Mansergh

As a result of their involvement in a dirty war, he put several Ministers of the Spanish Government behind bars. No one disputes that ETA is a terrorist organisation that murdered and committed horrific acts. This is not the issue and there is no ambivalence about it, but some people who engaged in or authorised a dirty war ended up behind bars. Subsequently, the judge banned the political front of ETA and proceeded extremely rigorously against ETA itself. If we intend to be rigorous, we must be so even-handedly. I fear that across the water, many punches are being pulled. I have heard it said at the highest level on the British side that the Finucane murder is a can of worms. The British Government knows how awful the Finucane case is and is trying to soften the blow. This is not acceptable and the Irish Government should use all diplomatic means to find a more satisfactory outcome.

The degree of co-operation between the Garda Síochána and the PSNI is somewhat satisfactory. Hopefully, this co-operation is free of any fears of collusion. This co-operation is symbolised by the fact that a former adviser to the Minister, and prior to that the Taoiseach when he was in Opposition, is now press relations officer for the PSNI. It is regrettable that the AGSI takes an unhelpful attitude towards the scheme of exchanges and co-operation between the Garda and the PSNI that has been approved by the Oireachtas. It is alleged the AGSI takes this attitude on safety grounds. There are indeed safety considerations but a cynic might suspect it had more to do with money even though the money seems to be very generous. This is not the right way to behave. Both police forces have an interest in maintaining peace and stability. We have moved on and are at a different stage to where we were in the past. A trade union should not be acting as a brake on or an impediment to this type of co-operation, which will hopefully improve circumstances in this country.

Mr. Cummins

The allegation that the AGSI's attitude towards the exchange and co-operation scheme is determined by money is unfair. It is unfair to make such an allegation when the people accused are not here to defend themselves.

Dr. Mansergh

How would the Senator defend it?

Mr. Cummins

I did not make the allegation.

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht - Thursday, 24 Mar 2005

Tribunals of Inquiry: Motion.

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 24 Mar 2005