Editorial: The Law Society was right to debate such an important issue as the legacy of the Troubles and should do so - but with a broader panel

​On Friday, the Law Society of Northern Ireland’s annual conference was going focus on the new Legacy Act.

The society president Brian Archer says they have been “a strong and vocal critic” of the measures, which are “incompatible with the obligations imposed on the UK by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998”.

Mr Archer said yesterday: “Solicitors play a vital role supporting victims and survivors of the Troubles seeking answers and accountability and I believe it is appropriate for the Law Society to hold events such as this to inform and educate our members. Freedom of expression and debate is an intrinsic and important aspect of the rule of law. However, we recognise the strength of feeling in opposition to this act.”

He postponed the event until the legality of the new arrangements has been tested in the courts.

As Mr Archer says, freedom of expression is vital. Billed conference speakers​ were to include the lawyer Kevin Winters, the head of the Wave Trauma Centre Sandra Peake, the victims’ commissioner Ian Jeffers and NI’s ex lord chief justice, Sir Declan Morgan – who will lead the new legacy commission.

None of the main speakers has endorsed the concerns of a large constituency of people who believe legacy has turned in a lop-sided way against the security forces – for example the Malone House Group (MHG), which includes a barrister and a solicitor. MHG say that Article 2 of the ECHR is repeatedly cited to the exclusion of other ECHR articles to justify the fact that almost all legacy inquests are into killings carried out by state forces – 10% of the Troubles dead. Are there not solicitors who are concerned at the courts being used to perpetuate such an imbalance, as even the Supreme Court now seems to be?

Organisations that opposed Friday’s event such as the Pat Finucane Centre have prevailed. The seminar should be reinstated for a later date, to include speakers who have a different view on legacy to the one expressed by the society.