Top UK legal minds slam Government over decision which could allow Gerry Adams to be compensated over his imprisonment

The Labour government’s planned amendments to the Tories’ controversial Legacy Act includes repealing two parts of the legislation which would have closed off compensation to people interned by the state on suspicion of terrorist offences.

Former government ministers – including from the last government – as well as luminaries in the legal profession and a former Supreme Court judge, have backed a paper by think tank Policy Exchange criticising Labour’s plans.

Shadow Attorney General, Lord Wolfson KC, has described the actions of the Government as “inexplicable and unexplained” and called on parliamentarians to ask hard questions about why the unanimous decision in 2023 to “block Gerry Adams from being paid public money” is now to be abandoned.

A judgement by the Supreme Court in 2020 ruled that former Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams had been unlawfully detained in the 1970s, and the only convictions he had – for trying to escape the Maze Prison – were overturned.

The ruling hinged on the argument that the decision to imprison Mr Adams had not been considered by the then Northern Ireland secretary, William Whitelaw. But the legislation governing internment allowed junior ministers to authorise detention, according to a minister who served in the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) at the time.

Lord Howell of Guildford, a junior NIO minister under Whitelaw, described the Supreme Court’s judgment as a “total misunderstanding of the nature of ministerial and departmental government and methods of operating”. The peer is one of the signatories to the Policy Exchange paper.

In 2023, Northern Ireland’s High Court said that the Legacy Act provisions which prevented Gerry Adams and others from claiming compensation were a breach of their human rights. The government did not appeal that decision. In February 2024 the court ruled that Parliament did not have “compelling grounds” for the Legacy Act legislation which closed off the possibility of claiming compensation.

However, a the Policy Exchange paper is urging ministers to rethink that - arguing that the High Court got it wrong. It says the government’s changes to the law are “wholly inappropriate”, and warns that a fundamental principle – that parliament can overturn decisions made by a court, is being undermined.

Professor Richard Ekins KC (Hon), Head of Policy Exchange’s Judicial Power Project and Professor of Law and Constitutional Government, University of Oxford and co-author of the report, has accused the government of “running roughshod over constitutional principle” and using ministerial powers to repeal legislation that was recently approved without division by the Houses of Parliament.

“The Government’s decision to change the law will reopen the door to a wave of meritless litigation in relation to events more than 50 years ago, which may result in hundreds of people who were lawfully detained then for suspected involvement in terrorism now being paid ‘compensation’, which is an unjust and wasteful use of public money. It also needlessly puts the lawfulness of a host of ordinary government acts in doubt, which is contrary to the rule of law”, Professor Ekins said.

The News Letter asked the Northern Ireland Office why the government had decided not to appeal the 2023 Belfast High Court ruling – and why it plans to repeal sections of the Legacy Act, which would have prohibited Gerry Adams and others interned from seeking compensation.

We also asked if the government for its response to the criticism by Policy Exchange that it is undermining the ability of parliament to overrule decisions of the courts by using powers under section 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 to repeal sections 46 and 47, and by not appealing the High Court decision.

At the time of going to print, there had been no response from the UK government on the questions posed by the Policy Exchange report.