Relatives Response to The Bloomfield Report

During the Irish peace negotiations in 1998 when prison releases were being discussed a debate began about the victims of violence. An emphasis was also placed on the needs of these victims.

The British Government commissioned the former head of the British civil service in the north of Ireland, Sir Kenneth Bloomfield, to initiate a consultation of victims in order to establish a way of remembering all victims. As the negotiations drew to a conclusion the completed report was presented to the British government. It had by now taken on more significance and under the Good Friday Agreement of 1998 provision had been made to implement its recommendations, primarily the appointment of a ‘Victims’ Commissioner’. Subsequently the British Minister in charge of the armed forces in the north of Ireland, Adam Ingram, was appointed.

Relatives for Justice met Sir Kenneth Bloomfield during his consultation process in early March 1998 and made representation to him on behalf of the many families with members maimed and killed by state forces and their agents. They outlined their aims and objectives as set out above.
 
RFJ was not approached by Mr.Bloomfield and a meeting only took place after intensive lobbying by RFJ. This was in contrast to the very proactive approach to other victims’ organisations and individuals.

Nevertheless RFJ took a positive approach to the meeting. Members pointed out that truth and justice are the most fitting and the only memorial to the dead.

RFJ members stressed that they cannot begin to fully grieve until truth has been established. And that we work with many families who cannot heal their open wound through the deliberate absence of truth and justice. These families have been devastated by state violence, cover ups and lies.

In setting the context for the document he had said in relation to a memorial that “We truly need to remember those who have suffered, to grieve... to reflect upon the truth of what occurred and to move forward from there.” He did not however offer any mechanism for us to judge on how truth can be established.

In response to the issue of truth the consultation report “We will remember them” made two references -one in relation to the possibility of the establishment of a truth commission and the other in relation to those families who have become known as the relatives of the disappeared.

A Truth Commission is one way which would allow for the establishment of the facts and truth of human rights violations during the conflict and is a model which could promote healing by allowing victims to restore some of what has been taken from them by allowing them to tell in a public forum what has happened to them and to their relatives.
It would allow for the validation of their experiences. Such a model would also contribute towards reconciliation, and has been used in areas of conflict resolution throughout the world.

Mr. Bloomfield chose to side step this issue. He spoke of the truth being used as a “weapon as well as a shield”. He went on to disregard his responsibility for victims by saying “ If the political leaders in Northern Ireland at some stage wish to pursue this possibility, I have no doubt that senior figures from South Africa would be more than willing to speak from their experience.”

RFJ members had shared their experience and had explained the need for truth to be established during the consultation - this was disregarded.

Relatives of those murdered by the state, like the families with relatives who have “disappeared” have the right to know the full circumstances of their loved ones death.

In relation to the families of the disappeared Mr. Bloomfield spoke of “one of the most fundamental of human instincts is to seek certain knowledge of the fate of a husband or wife, son or daughter, brother or sister.” He says, “Common humanity cries out for this modest act of mercy” and recommends a course of action for truth to be established.

Families with loved ones killed by the state and its agents have the same humanity and the same right to truth. He did not offer them any recourse to truth; they were side stepped once again.

Unlike other relatives, RFJ members did not receive invitations to the launch of his report this confirmed their suspicion that his report would not reflect their needs and interests.

He remembered to include many others - but he forgot those killed by the state and its agents. They were treated as second class during the consultation process and were deemed second class in the recommendations of his document.

Some of the dead take priority in this report - British Army personnel, RUC members and prison officers are deemed appropriate for “special concern”.

Members of all of these services have been guilty of some of the most vile human rights abuses recorded in this conflict. They had colluded with deaths squads, killed 361 people officially, tortured both physically and mentally thousands more, they have maimed others, including children with their weapons - all without fear of prosecution or having to ever answer for these crimes. Mr. Bloomfield did not recognise these thousands in his report.

While RFJ acknowledged that the 'Bloomfield Report' was a welcome development for many victims and survivors of violence, and they were glad for those people, it must also be acknowledged that it did not offer those represented by RFJ any form of recourse or comfort. It did the opposite.  It affirmed that their suffering and loss is some what less.

If we are to move forward and build a just and equitable society which fully acknowledges what has gone before there cannot be a league table of victims. They must all be treated in an evenhanded way - sensitively and comprehensively. This report does not lay the foundation for this process, and furthermore cannot lay the foundation for real reconciliation.

As a confirmation of these fears the appointment of Adam Ingram as a “Champion for Victims” added insult to injury.

Mr. Ingram is presently charged with the promotion and safeguarding of the interests of the security forces. Security forces which since his appointment continue to violate human rights.

Relatives of those killed directly or indirectly by state forces cannot have confidence in his appointment.

It is inconceivable to believe that Mr. Ingram could understand or possibly make any contribution to the needs of these victims.

In March 1998 he rejected a call by the UN Special Rapporteur Data Parma Cumaraswamy for an independent investigation into the violent death of human rights lawyer Pat Finucane and reports of state harassment of legal representatives.

RFJ members experience has been the active cover up of the circumstances, leading up to, during and in the aftermath of the deaths of their loved ones - in the interest of the state and its forces, interests which Mr. Ingram is charged with continuing to protect.

It is totally reprehensible and extremely insensitive to the families that RFJ represents that he should given such a role. He is completely partial. A ‘champion for victims’ should have been appointed from the international community that would have been acceptable to all victims and survivors.

Many had presumed in the aftermath of the Good Friday document that the issue of all victims would have been handled sensitively, evenly and with equality. That recognition and acknowledgement would have been afforded to all those who suffer, not some.

This has failed to happen thus far. Instead those families left bereaved and the hundreds of people maimed and injured by the state are once again the Forgotten Victims.

Many still hold the view that Adam Ingram is not an acceptable commissioner and that this report cannot be acceptable when it excludes us, our interests, our concerns and our feelings.

RFJ publicly call on Adam Ingram to prove his bona fide as an impartial ‘Minister for Victims’. If truly he has the concern of those who have suffered then RFJ in the first instance ask him to comply with the latest recommendations of the UN and to make public the entire findings of the Stalker/ Sampson and Stevens Inquiries. In complying with this esteemed body he would go a considerable way in gaining the confidence of victims, survivors and those left bereaved by state and state sponsored violence.

As this article goes to print the Irish Government have appointed John Wilson as ‘Victims Commissioner’ as part of their contribution to the Good Friday Agreement.

RFJ welcome the appointment by the Irish Government of a 'Victim's Commissioner' but would cautioned against it being a repetition of the Bloomfield Report' which ignored and further isolated the victims and survivors of state violence.

The much heralded 'Bloomfield Commission' and subsequent 'report' 'We Will Remember Them' ignored those views and specific needs represented to it by RFJ. It forgot about them, 361 families bereaved by the direct actions of British forces in our country and countless others through collusion. It reinforced the league table of the 'deserving' and 'undeserving' victims and survivors.