Troubles Bill to confirm in law that on-the-run letters did not grant immunity
The UK Government’s Northern Ireland Troubles Bill will establish in law that the so-called on-the-run letters did not grant immunity for any crimes.
The on-the-run letter scheme saw 200 people told they were not wanted for paramilitary crimes committed before the Belfast Agreement in 1998.
Also known as letters of comfort, the scheme came to light following the collapse of the 2014 trial of John Downey over the 1982 IRA bombing of Hyde Park.
Northern Ireland Secretary Sir Chris Bryant tabled New Clause 51 on Tuesday, which will make clear in the Troubles Bill that these letters “cannot be used to prevent or frustrate a prosecution”.
He said: “At second reading and in our engagement on the Bill, there has been considerable concern about the so-called on-the-run letters.
“These letters did not provide any individual with immunity from prosecution, and they are not legally binding guarantees against future prosecution.
“This is something that has been confirmed by the 2014 Hallett review, numerous ministers under successive administrations, including the former prime minister David Cameron.
“It has also been reiterated by the current chief constable of the PSNI, Jon Boutcher.”
Sir Chris added: “I think a lot of families that I spoke to in Northern Ireland felt that that on-the-run letters were part of a sort of amnesty that was granted to some people and not to others, or was granted to everyone, and that that meant that they were never going to get answers to what happened to their loved ones. That was always wrong.
“I understand why people made difficult decisions when it came to the Good Friday Agreement, but you don’t get peace without justice.”
He concluded: “I think it’s really important that at this stage now we recognise that we need to get as many answers for people as possible, and that there cannot be that kind of immunity, amnesty, whatever you may call it.”
Shadow Northern Ireland secretary Alex Burghart welcomed the new clause, asserting it “ends the debate on the highly controversial on-the-run letters”.
He said: “These were letters issued by the government to republican suspects, primarily those affiliated to the IRA, and they arose because, whilst the 1998 Agreement’s early release scheme covered convicted paramilitary prisoners, it did not cover those who had never been charged, had been charged but had escaped, or had escaped after conviction.
“Sinn Fein argued that this was anomalous, and that resolving the status of such individuals, many of whom were seen as important to republican support for the peace process, was necessary.
“Where Sinn Fein identified concerned individuals, the government then assessed whether they were not wanted, and if they were not, a letter of reassurance was issued.
“It’s long been argued that such letters did not offer immunity to prosecution.
“However, this was not so, because in 2014, John Downey, an IRA man accused of perpetrating the 1982 Hyde Park bombing, produced his letter at the Old Bailey, and the trial collapsed.
“Whilst it was said that Mr Downey’s letter had been issued in error, there is no doubt that that letter prevented him from being put on trial for that crime.
“Whatever confidence there was in the scheme then completely collapsed and despite the considerable work of Lady Justice Hallett, doubts have lingered.
“The Government is right to put this issue beyond all doubt and to make an amendment to its Bill.”
Alliance MP Sorcha Eastwood said she believes the message from the Commons must be that “terrorism was always wrong”.
The Lagan Valley MP said: “I think it’s at the crux of this entire discussion that it must go out from this House that terrorism was always wrong, and that people in Northern Ireland and across the UK need to understand now that these letters never have, never will, and shall not be used to frustrate or deny any potential prosecutions that may come forward.
“Because too many people in Northern Ireland have felt that actually there have been too many cosying up with terrorists in the past, and I hope that people will take comfort from this.”
Sir Chris replied: “I completely agree with every single word that she said. I think it absolutely needs to go out from this House that terrorism was and remains wrong in every single regard.
“Those who resorted to violence did so for reasons of their own, but not reasons that we could possibly countenance, and we do not countenance in the legislation that we are advancing today.”