Editorial: The very premise of the Kenova investigation into Stakeknife should have been challenged from day one

The web version of this editorial will link to the website of the Kenova-investigation (click here for it).

It is hard to find in it a simple timeline as to the origins of this huge inquiry. You are told it is a probe into activities around an “individual codenamed Stakeknife”.

You are also told, it the near-gobbledygook of the legacy world, that its “overarching strategy ... is to provide effective, efficient and independent investigations that are Article 2 ECHR compliant”. (Art 2, for those who don’t know, has often been cited to justify an undue legacy focus on historic allegations against state forces)

Then you are told: “Many are concerned at the involvement of this alleged State agent in kidnap, torture and murder by the ... IRA during ‘the troubles’ and believe they were preventable.”

It is a failure of government ministers and unionist politicians, admirable exceptions such as Jeff Dudgeon apart, that this inquiry was not challenged from its inception. The po-faced authors of the Kenova website might feel that “many are concerned at the role of this state agent”. But that “many” would soon evaporate into few if the public was told that Stakeknife was perhaps the most successful penetration of IRA murder machine.

In a healthy political environment, we would celebrate how the IRA became so riddled with informers that it sued for peace in 1994 and use it as the template for an examination of how we can repeat and hone such success in future if needed. Instead, security force and intelligence operatives were put in fear of prosecution for Stakeknife. The prime minister must publicly thank them for their skill in running agents. Many IRA men came to see that they had become involved in something rotten and turned against the terror group. Tragically some were executed before they could be rescued. The blame for that lies solely with IRA leaders, whose own legacies are always shielded.