Loyalist pastor loses High Court challenge to alleged 'policy of secrecy' over Stormont Executive meetings

Clifford Peeples issued judicial review proceedings after records about an encounter between the First and Deputy First Ministers and a Chinese diplomat were initially withheld.

His lawyers claimed a wider Executive Office policy of non-disclosure breached the Ministerial Code, along with principles of transparency and accountability in government.

But a judge rejected the case after highlighting how Mr Peeples could have made a Freedom of Information request as an alternative remedy.

Mr Justice Humphreys ruled today: “This is fatal to his judicial review leave application.

“Parliament has created a scheme which is intended to balance the competing public interests at play when disclosure is sought from public authorities.”

Legal action was brought against the Northern Ireland Executive over claims it has adopted a policy to ensure information about meetings is not disclosed.

Mr Peeples, who now describes himself as a writer and political commentator, alleged that the public was not being informed about either their schedule or content.

He challenged a statement in July 2024, issued in response to a request from journalists for a schedule of forthcoming meetings, that aspects of Executive business are regarded as confidential.

Counsel for Mr Peeples also disputed a decision not to provide any notice of, or release the records of a meeting Michelle O’Neill and Emma Little-Pengelly held with the Chinese Ambassador to the UK at Stormont Castle in May last year.

At the time, the Executive Office declined to publish notes of the encounter due to concerns that it could harm international relations.

Redacted details were subsequently released after Amnesty International made a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Legal action was mounted in an attempt to “reverse a policy of secrecy”, it was contended.

But backing the Executive’s case, the judge held that Mr Peeples could have explored a system which ensures decisions on disclosure are made fairly and in accordance with legal principles.

“The FOIA is inescapably a suitable alternative remedy which this applicant has failed to use,” he said.

Mr Justice Humphreys also identified no merit in any of the grounds of challenge.

Dismissing the legal action, he confirmed: “The applicant has not established an arguable case with realistic prospects of success.”