Editorial: RUC officers were found guilty of collusion in 1994 Loughinisland massacre by unfair process

​Retired police officers won a victory in the Belfast courts yesterday on the ex police ombudsman’s use of the term “collusive behaviours”.

The story that we report about is a saga that began with complaints about the RUC response to the grievous 1994 loyalist massacre of civilians watching football in Loughinisland.

The controversy began when the then Ombudsman Al Hutchinson issued a report in 2011 which did not find collusion in the killings. That report was quashed by the Belfast courts at the behest of Dr Michael Maguire, who as criminal justice inspector criticised that report, then later became ombudsman. He issued a new report that did find collusion.

In 2018, Mr Justice McCloskey was scathing about his findings. He said RUC officers “were, in effect, accused, tried and convicted without notice and in their absence”.

Then there was an allegation of bias against the judge, which he firmly rejected, yet stood aside even so (out of respect for the families of the Loughinisland victims). The current lady chief justice, Siobhan Keegan, then a high court judge, later issued a completely different ruling to McCloskey. The NI appeal court, under Sir Declan Morgan, criticised Dr Maguire for overstepping the mark in his collusion findings but in effect upheld Keegan.

It was found that the ombudsman could not find collusion. As the ex RUC officers said, this effectively branded them guilty of colluding in brutal terrorist murders without due process. But Marie Anderson then issued reports finding police guilty of “collusive behaviours”.

This is a wide-ranging scandal, not least the fact that Ms Anderson was not sacked after ​police were reportedly refused access to her property. Clearly she should not have been allowed to adjudicate on PSNI officers until there was transparency on that incident. But yesterday’s ruling was a step towards justice.