October 7th 2003
PSNI and MoD in contempt of court for failing to comply with Coroner’s ruling to provide material and video-tapes regarding
SAS and loyalist killings
The preliminary inquests into the killings of Tony Doris, Lawrence
McNally, and Peter Ryan, on June 3rd 1991 by the SAS. The SAS killings
of Kevin Barry O’Donnell, Peter Clancy, Sean O’Farrell, and Daniel
Vincent on February 16th 1992. And of loyalist killing of 76 year-old
Roseanne Mallon on May 8th 1994 in her home, also in Tyrone, in which
collusion is evidenced resumed today at Dungannon Court County Tyrone.
At the last preliminary hearing the Coroner, Roger McLarnon, gave the MoD and the PSNI 21 days to present the relevant
documentation to the court.
Today legal representatives for the PSNI and the MoD failed to provide
the necessary documentation as specified by the Coroner 21 days ago.
Speaking after today’s
proceedings the sister of Kevin Barry O’Donnell, Roisin Ui Mhuiri,
speaking on behalf of RFJ for all the families said that; ‘both the MoD
and the PSNI have failed to comply with the Coroner’s previous ruling
by not providing the necessary documents and videos. They are in
contempt of the Coroner’s ruling last month. We believe that the
Coroner should now judicially review the failure of the Chief
Constable, Hugh Orde, and the Secretary of State, Paul Murphy, without
delay.
‘In his deliberations this morning the Coroner, Roger McLarnon, went to
lengths to explain to the families the legal positions, particularly in
light of the Human Rights Act and the recent European Court rulings
with regard to Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. He
stressed that cases such as the four before him are of a complex and
controversial nature. The Coroner went on to say that within the
jurisdiction other similar cases in England warranted Public Inquiries
citing the recent death of Dr. David Kelly, and the Stephen Lawrence
inquiries as examples.’
‘He also went on to say that Coroners in the north were expected,
without legislation change or guidance from the Home Office, to make
judgments on these matters with current legislation that is both
outdated and incompatible with international obligations as determined
both by Article 2 and the Human Rights Act. He was mindful that any
determinations taken would have implications for all future inquests.’
For further information please contact Mark Thompson RFJ
END
