The ongoing legacy of Northern Ireland’s Troubles continues to loom large, evoking strong emotions and anger.
Families of many conflict victims enthusiastically welcomed Labour’s victory in the recent UK general election, as the party vowed to repeal the highly contentious legislation implemented by the former Conservative government to address legacy issues.
This legislation garnered a rare consensus, uniting all major political parties, victims and survivors’ organizations in Northern Ireland, along with the Irish Government, against it.
Hilary Benn was quick to articulate his stance on the matter.
Afterward, the new representative at Hillsborough Castle informed the media of his intention to collaborate with the Irish Government on a refreshed approach to legacy.
Hilary Benn alongside Micheál Martin and Helen McEntee at the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference
The Irish Government has initiated an inter-state case against the UK under the European Convention of Human Rights to legally contest the Northern Ireland Legacy Act.
The British government is eager to resolve this case as part of efforts to mend relations with Ireland, which have been strained under successive Conservative administrations.
Those advocating for victims and survivors of the Troubles were encouraged by the swift engagement with the issue and many cautiously expressed optimism that Labour would fulfill their promise and entirely annul the legislation.
However, unease was triggered when Mr. Benn repeatedly indicated in the early days of his term that a crucial component of the legislation, the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR), might be kept in place.
Campaigners, including Amnesty International, asserted that retaining the ICRIR would constitute a violation of Labour’s election manifesto commitment to repeal the Act.
The individuals associated with the commission significantly influence perceptions of it.
Betrayal
The leader of the commission, Declan Morgan, a former Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, previously received considerable acclaim from victims’ groups for his attempts to expedite inquests into killings during the Troubles.
Many considered his choice to chair the Commission a betrayal, while Mr. Morgan and the UK government contend that this represents their best opportunity to uncover the truth.
In the ICRIR’s mission statement on its website, Mr. Morgan expressed his belief that the Commission is positioned “to provide answers that people have been waiting for far too long.”
Declan Morgan’s appointment as chair of the ICRIR was perceived by some as a betrayal.
Peter Sheridan, the Commissioner for Investigations, poses additional concerns for some.
The former CEO of Co-operation Ireland and ex-Assistant Chief Constable of the PSNI was the highest-ranking Catholic officer within the force prior to his retirement, having joined the RUC in the 1970s.
During his time as Assistant Chief Constable, he was responsible for drafting a Memorandum of Understanding relating to informers and agents in cooperation with the British security service MI5.
While he is broadly respected across the political spectrum, many relatives of Troubles victims are apprehensive about his law enforcement background and question his ability to serve as a truly impartial arbitrator when investigating alleged misconduct by the British state.
Peter Sheridan was the highest-ranking Catholic officer in the PSNI, having joined the RUC in the 1970s.
Following his appointment, Mr. Sheridan asserted his impartiality, stating he would carry out his new role “without fear or favour.”
He added, “There is nothing I desire more than to ensure people receive the information and closure they need, utilizing the full extent of the powers and tools that the Commission will employ in this work, so we can all progress together.”
Mr. Benn has persisted in championing the Commission, yet victims’ groups continue to stand firmly against it.
Major setback
The Northern Secretary’s agenda faced a significant setback just before Christmas when a judge in the High Court in Belfast mandated the British government to conduct a public inquiry into the murder of GAA official Sean Brown, who was kidnapped and killed by loyalist gunmen in May 1997.
Mr. Benn had earlier declined a request from a coroner, who was overseeing an inquest into Mr. Brown’s murder, to initiate a public inquiry, with the PSNI asserting they would not obstruct it.
In a letter to the attorneys representing the family, Mr. Benn stated he had determined that an inquiry “is not the best way to proceed.”
Additionally, he asserted that he believed the ICRIR could fulfill the government’s human rights obligations in this case.
Sean Brown was abducted and murdered by loyalists in May 1997.
However, in the recent High Court decision, Mr. Justice Michael Humphreys indicated that “no viable alternative to a public inquiry has been presented” and concluded that “there can be only one lawful answer: a public inquiry must be convened.”
After the ruling, Mr. Brown’s widow, 88-year-old Bridie, who has campaigned for a public inquiry for over 25 years, labeled it a good day.
The ruling reportedly took Mr. Benn and his team at the Northern Ireland Office by surprise.
The Northern Secretary is widely respected across the political landscape, and it is commonly acknowledged that he is well-versed in his responsibilities.
Those who have met with him to discuss legacy issues, even those who disagree with aspects of his approach, do not dispute his depth of knowledge.
There is an emerging understanding that many within the victims’ community may never accept the ICRIR in its current form as a viable way forward, suggesting that reform is essential.
Bridie Brown with a photograph of her husband Sean, who was killed in 1997 by loyalists.
“His primary focus is legacy,” remarked an official who has observed him closely.
“He has made it clear that resolving this issue is his primary goal because he recognizes the pain it has caused and is determined to find a solution.”
“He has said he will heed the voices of those who lost loved ones, and he has been attentive to their concerns.”
The pressing question is: will reform suffice?
It appears unlikely that many critics of the ICRIR will be satisfied with minimal changes to its scope and authority.
Many have explicitly indicated they desire a complete overhaul, advocating for the dissolution of both the Commission and the entire Legacy Act.
Political legacy
The Northern Secretary’s handling of the Commission in the upcoming months will likely determine whether he can achieve his stated objective of addressing the legacy issue.
An approach that is embraced by victims’ groups and their advocates could significantly shift the political atmosphere and garner the necessary “buy-in” for meaningful progress.
Conversely, a strategy that fails to garner such support could leave the Northern Secretary in a position akin to that of his Conservative predecessors: facing resistance from all principal political parties, as well as from victims and survivor groups.
This would also affect the Irish Government’s inter-state legal action.
Taoiseach Simon Harris and Tánaiste Micheál Martin have consistently reiterated that legacy approaches should prioritize victims, and they are unlikely to agree to withdraw legal proceedings as long as those victims oppose the UK’s stance.
Northern Secretary Hilary Benn pictured conversing with Tánaiste Micheál Martin earlier this year.
A lawyer representing Bridie Brown recently urged Mr. Benn and the British government to do what they deemed “the right thing” and promptly convene a public inquiry.
The Northern Ireland Office has stated it will carefully review the court’s ruling before making any decisions.
An appeal and subsequent court proceedings would only further frustrate victims’ advocacy groups.
“They seem to expect us all to pass away, hoping this will dissipate,” remarked a relative of a Troubles victim shortly after the Sean Brown ruling.
“That’s simply cruel.”
Mr. Benn might yet be celebrated as the individual who resolves one of the most contentious and sensitive matters on Northern Ireland’s political agenda.
However, it is equally plausible that he may soon find himself compared unfavorably to some of his less popular Conservative predecessors regarding efforts to address this issue.
His own political legacy is also at stake.
