Bloody Sunday soldiers must return to Derry
Soldiers who opened fire on Bloody Sunday must return to Derry to give evidence at the inquiry into the shootings, it was announced today.
The tribunal chaired by Lord Saville of Newdigate ruled that the city was "the proper place" for military witnesses to testify about the killings of 13 Catholic men and youths during a civil rights demonstration almost three decades ago.
Around 250 military witnesses are to be called into the witness box at the multi-million pound probe, which has been sitting in public in the Guildhall, Derry, for more than a year.
Among them will be the Paratroopers who fired the lethal shots that day, January 30 1972.
Lawyers acting for the soldiers fought to have the hearings transferred to Great Britain when the men were called to testify, probably in the spring of next year.
But in its ruling the tribunal concluded:
In the light of the information presently available to us, we consider that none of the arguments put forward by those acting on behalf of the soldiers is sufficient to provide a compelling reason for not hearing the oral evidence of the soldiers at the Guildhall, which we regard as the proper place for this inquiry.
"We accordingly rule that this is where that evidence should be give"
The troops legal representatives argued that the men’s lives would be at risk from republican terrorists and public disorder because of the strong emotions Bloody Sunday still evokes in the city.
The tribunal acknowledged that the security agencies believed the risk to soldier witnesses of terrorist reprisals would be higher in Northern Ireland than in Great Britain but concluded that the troops could still be adequately protected by security forces for tribunal appearances in the city.
The ruling stated: "It seems to us that the fact that the risk is greater in the one place rather than the other is not of itself determinative of the matter.
"It is incumbent on the authorities (which in the present case include both the tribunal and the agencies responsible for the protection of witnesses) to do all that can reasonably be expected of them to avoid a real and immediate risk to life of which they have or ought to have knowledge.
"We are satisfied, on the basis of the security advice that we have received, that the security authorities in Northern Ireland can provide, for soldiers giving evidence at the Guildhall, a level of protection sufficient to avoid any such risk.
"In such circumstances we consider that the tribunal would not be acting incompatibly with the rights of the soldiers by requiring them to give evidence at the Guildhall rather than in London, for in neither place would there be a real and immediate risk to them.
"Neither the MoD nor the RUC (the state authorities who have the duty to protect the soldiers while giving evidence and who must accordingly deploy the proper resources to do so) have advised us that, notwithstanding the security precautions that they could and would put in place for soldiers giving evidence at the Guildhall, the level of risk would be so high that it could be described as real and immediate or in terms to the same or similar effect.
"We have of course borne in mind the history of terrorist attacks on military and other targets in Northern Ireland, particularly those that have recently taken place in and around the city, and the present situation with regard to terrorist organisations.
"We have also borne in mind that over at least the last thirty years, it appears that the protection afforded by state authorities to those required to attend courts in Northern Ireland, often in circumstances of the greatest controversy where the risk of terrorist attacks has clearly been high, has been sufficient to avert any loss of life or injury from terrorist organisations.
"In our judgment the authorities will have done all that could reasonably be expected of them by providing as they say that they can, a level of security commensurate with what has regularly (and successfully) been provided for trials in Northern Ireland where persons at risk such as soldiers, security officers, informers and others have been required to attend.
"In these circumstances we consider that it could not properly or reasonably be said that the tribunal should remove itself from the Guildhall to Great Britain for the purpose of hearing the evidence of the soldiers, which forms, of course a central part of the inquiry," the ruling said.
The tribunal was established in early 1998 and set out a preliminary view in December that year that the natural place to hold an inquiry of its type was where the events in question occurred.
Today’s ruling states: "We have no doubt that our preliminary view is correct. We are a tribunal comprised of members from three countries charged with seeking the truth about Bloody Sunday.
"On that day in a city in Northern Ireland, citizens of the United Kingdom were killed and wounded by British troops. The events of that day, though of great national and international concern, have undoubtedly had their most serious and lasting effects on the people of that city. It is there that the grief and outrage that the events occasioned are centred.
"It seems to us that the chances of this inquiry restoring public confidence in general and that of the people most affected in particular (which is the object of public inquiries of this kind) would be very seriously diminished (if not destroyed) by holding the inquiry or a major part of the inquiry far away and across the Irish Sea, unless there were compelling reasons to do so."
The inquiry is currently in recess and returns for public hearings on September 3.
