Truth Or Continuing Cover Up? A Full Public Judicial Inquiry Now

Nationalist and Unionist leaders have also highlighted these cases. They are cases of "urgent public importance". What could be more important than allegations of a state's involvement in the murder of its own citizens?

In British law, if a matter is of "urgent public importance" and has been passed by both houses of parliament then a public inquiry under the Tribunals of Inquiry Act 1921 must be established. Such an inquiry will have all the powers of the High Court to call for relevant material and subpoena relevant witnesses who can be questioned in public.

If the two governments and the local political leaders have highlighted these cases then why not establish public inquiries in these cases immediately? Why go to the time and expense of appointing a judge to hold six private investigations, particularly if it is likely that full public inquiries will be set up afterwards? It doesn't make any sense.

Unless, of course, the real reason for the appointment is delay or, more concerning to the Finucane family, if the real reason is to prevent the establish a full public judicial inquiry by the establishment of something less in the guise of something more.

The Finucane family want the truth. They don't want a report from a judge who examines the facts in secret and then publishes a report which purports to be the truth.

The facts should be examined in public where the family can challenge any purported explanation or denial. They are entitled to have an input into the calling of relevant evidence and the questioning of relevant witnesses. They will be able to do none of this if the Weston Park proposals are implemented. It will take a very long time for any judge to "thoroughly investigate" six complex cases.

That is why the Finucane family see this effort as a cynical exercise in delaying or attempting to prevent the inevitable. They took the same view when John Stevens was appointed, for the third time, to re investigate Pat's murder. The family decided to treat the Stevens police investigation as a delaying tactic and the public can decide if the family took the correct approach.

The third Stevens investigation or Stevens 3, as it is known, resulted in a delay of three years. A trial resulted in which Billy Stobie was acquitted. He was subsequently murdered. The Stevens report, whether published or not will instil no confidence that Pat's case was thoroughly investigated no more than the establishment of a judge to privately investigate the same thing in which the family have no meaningful input.

The Finucane family were not informed that Pat's case was going to be used by the two governments as a "bargaining chip" in the peace process. The case has been the subject of a high profile campaign for thirteen years.

What is emerging and what is now in the public domain is a picture of the British government's involvement in the murder of its own citizens. The British military unit which directed Brian Nelson who directed the UDA, was apparently involved in hundreds of murders of nationalists and republicans, including that of Pat Finucane. That is the allegation. That allegation has been published time and time again by many investigative journalists. Pat Finucane was subjected to death threats from RUC officers in Castlereagh Interrogation Centre prior to his murder. These threats were documented prior to his murder. Douglas Hogg, the British Home Office Minister made a statement in the House of Commons that some solicitors were sympathetic to the IRA, three weeks before the murder. Pat was murdered with a British Army browning pistol. Brian Nelson, the British army agent , who directed the murder, was directed by the secret British Army unit, the Force Research Unit (FRU). Billy Stobie, who was an RUC agent provided the weapons for the murder.

In 1999 on the 10th anniversary of Pat's murder, British Irish Rights Watch compiled a report which included copies of British military documentation. The documents contained information which led to the clear conclusion that the military unit ( the FRU ) were involved in conspiracy to murder.

The Report was handed to the British Government with a request to authenticate the documents. So far they have not refuted the allegation that the documents are genuine. The disturbing thing is that they have not denied that such a conspiracy existed.

The European Court rulings last May ( Jordan, McKerr, Shanaghan, and Kelly v UK ) severely criticised the British Government for their failure to provide a proper investigative process for hundreds of cases involving state or loyalist killings. The six cases highlighted at Weston Park are not the only cases in which there are serious concerns about state involvement in murder. The four cases taken to Strasbourg were representative of hundreds of cases which, over a thirty year period, were not properly investigated.

Tony Blair said, when he established the Saville Inquiry into Bloody Sunday, that 

"Bloody Sunday was different because, where the state's own authorities are concerned, we must be as sure as we can of the truth, precisely because we pride ourselves on our democracy and respect for the law, and on the professionalism and dedication of our security forces."

The Finucane family and other human rights organisations such as the Human Rights Commission do not regard the Weston Park proposals as satisfying the requirements of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. They do not see why they have to get over another hurdle. The campaign will continue. The family will continue to seek support. They have waited long enough for the truth. Pat Finucane in his short career sought justice for a large number of people. He was too successful. I have to play my part in seeking justice for him. I owe him that at least.