UNITED KINGDOM : HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERNS

KILLINGS BY SECURITY FORCES IN NORTHERN IRELAND

30 July 1991

Amnesty International wrote to the United Kingdom Government on 25 July about killings by members of the security forces in Northern Ireland . The killings in disputed circumstances by security forces in Northern Ireland have generated public controversy for over a decade. Amnesty International said it was imperative that allegations of a "shoot now, ask questions later" policy be thoroughly and impartially examined. The related issues of legislative and other provisions to restrict the use of lethal force, the investigation of such use and the full accountability of the security forces before the public and the law should also be reviewed.

Government action continues to rely on procedures which have been shown to be inadequate either to elicit essential information required for the purpose of investigations, so that justice can be done, or to make such information publicly available, so that justice can be seen to be done. As stated in Amnesty International's recent report, entitled United in Human Rights Concerns , a consequence of inadequate procedures is "the frequent allegation that information is suppressed and that the unlawful actions of agents of the state have been deliberately concealed." New developments in several cases have tended to confirm this view.

Recent public reports, notably the British Broadcasting Corporation's (BBC's) Public Eye programme broadcast 14 June 1991, have raised further issues related to the inquiry carried out by senior police officers John Stalker and Colin Sampson into six killings in 1982. It was reported that Chief Constable Colin Sampson had recommended in 1987 that some Royal Ulster Constabulary officers be prosecuted on charges, including conspiracy to murder Michael Tighe (one of the six killed in 1982). The government has not responded to this statement. Prosecutions were not brought against any of the police officers involved, on "national security" grounds. An implication of this new report is that the failure to bring prosecutions resulted in a deliberate concealment of evidence of possible unlawful actions of state officials. It has also been reported that Colin Sampson recommended charges be brought against MI5 officers (intelligence officers) for the deliberate destruction of a tape recording of the shooting of Michael Tighe, which was considered to be of crucial importance by John Stalker and Colin Sampson in determining whether to bring charges of murder against RUC officers. This, too, has not been commented on uy the government: the alleged destruction of evidence in the case had not been addressed in the government's brief summary of the inquiry's findings in January 1988. If the account of Colin Sampson's recommendation is accurate, the implication is that the government condoned the deliberate destruction of evidence in a potential murder case.

More recent cases have further eroded public confidence in government action. An investigation, broadcast by the BBC's Panorama programme on 22 July 1991, cited new information about several recent incidents of disputed killings by the security forces which Amnesty International had already raised with the authorities. The programme claimed that in some incidents soldiers may have lied about what had happened, or tampered with the evidence. In one incident it was alleged that soldiers faked an injury in order to support their claim that one soldier had been hit by a car. It also alleged that soldiers fired shots at suspects' heads "after they had ceased to pose any threat". Amnesty International has sought clarification as to whether the Director of Public Prosecutions has requested the RUC to reopen investigations on the basis of the reported new evidence.

Clarification was also sought on why senior police officers from another force have not been requested to investigate disputed killings, as had been recommended after the Stalker/Sampson inquiry, in apparent recognition that the daily confrontational situation of the security forces in Northern Ireland made it more difficult to ensure a totally impartial investigation of security force actions.

Reports of inadequate investigations of such incidents continue to persist, despite recommendations made as a result of the Stalker/Sampson inquiry. It has been reported that soldiers have been debriefed collectively or individually by senior military authorities and/or lawyers before they were interviewed by the police and sometimes they were not interviewed individually. It has also been reported that there have been considerable delays before the military authorities have allowed police to interview soldiers allegedly involved in disputed killings. Amnesty International requested information on procedures for interviewing soldiers allegedly involved in killings as contrasted with those in force for police officers or civilians.

Amnesty International is concerned that the families of those killed are not informed properly of the death, nor are they kept informed of the investigation into t!)e killing. The families consider they are treated with suspicion or total neglect. Furthermore in many instances the families have been hampered in their efforts to establish facts; many families have, for example, been refused copies of the autopsy reports. The Caraher family was refused permission to arrange an independent forensic examination of the car in which Fergal Caraher was shot on 30 December 1990. Moreover, in some instances family members have alleged that they were subjected to harassment after the deaths.

It is difficult to understand why families should be refused access to autopsy reports. There seems to be considerable confusion on the part of coroners as to whether they should distribute these in advance of inquests or not: one coroner has distributed the full report; another has refused to distribute anything and a third distributed a summary of the report. The Coroners Rules ( Northern Ireland ) should be changed to ensure that families receive these objective scientific facts as soon as they are available; the same should apply to other forensic evidence. There can be no justification for the denial of this information to the families of the deceased.

The investigations still do not meet the minimum standards for proper investigations of disputed killings, as laid out by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on summary or arbitrary executions in January 1988. These include: promptness, impartiality, thoroughness and publication of the findings of the investigation. He also stated that the family of the victim and lawyers should be able to participate in the investigatory proceedings and have access to substantive information at various stages of the investigation. In cases where the normal investigatory procedure is inadequate he recommended that an independent commission of inquiry be established with the necessary authority and powers to carry out impartial and effective investigations.

In addition, current investigative procedures in Norihern Ireland contravene the United Nations Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-Legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions, endorsed by the General Assembly in 1989. The Special Rapporteur has stated in his January 1991 report that where a government's practice fails to meet these standards he "will consider such failure as an indication of that Government's responsibility, even where Government officials are found not to be directly involved in the acts of summary or arbitrary executions". Principle 9 requires governments to conduct a thorough, prompt and impartial investigation in such cases. In the cases cited above it appears that the authorities have not conducted thorough, prompt or impartial investigations. In some cases they have not examined all the relevant evidence, prevented prosecutions, failed to investigate reports of destruction of evidence or conducted investigations in a manner likely to lead to or to facilitate fabrication of evidence or perjury. In some cases they have unreasonably delayed investigations or hindered immediate access to suspects.

The investigation of such incidents is considerably delayed by the length of time taken by the Director of Public Prosecutions in making a decision concerning possible prosecutions. For example, Brian Robinson was killed in September 1989 but as of mid-July no decision has yet been made on any possible prosecutions of the soldiers involved. The delays in holding inquests are of concern. No inquest involving killings by members of the security forces has taken place since November 1989. Both of the appeals to the House of Lords concerning inquest procedures (McKerr and Breslin, Devine and Devine) could have been expedited, if the Attorney General had considered the interests of the many families awaiting an inquest.

Principle 10 of the UN Principles states that the investigative authority should have the power to obtain all the necessary information, including the authority to oblige officials allegedly involved to appear and testify. In the case of inquests, the investigative authority, the coroner, does not have the power to obtain all the necessary information because the Coroners Rules explicitly rule out the coroner's requiring the officials allegedly involved in such incidents to appear and testify at the inquest.

Moreover, as indicated above, military authorities have hindered immediate police access to soldiers the police wished to question.

Current rules and practice in Northern Ireland directly contravene Principle 16 which provides that families of the deceased and their legal representatives should have access to all information relevant to the investigation. Principle 17 provides that a written report shall be made available to the public on the methods and findings of such investigations. The government has repeatedly told Amnesty International that reports of police investigations are never made public.

The United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials contains detailed provisions expanding on Article 3 of the UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials. They establish strict limitations on when force and firearms can be used; require a reporting and review process when they are used; and require that abusive or unlawful use is punishable. The UN has called on its member states, including the United Kingdom , to respect and implement the Basic Principles and to take them into account when formulating appropriate legislation and policy directives. Furthermore the UN also invited member states to bring the Basic Principles to the attention of law enforcement officials and other members of the executive branch of government, judges, lawyers, the legislature and the public in general.

Amnesty International has sought clarification on what steps the government has taken to bring each of these international standards to the attention of various official bodies within the United Kingdom, and in particular in Northern Ireland. We would also like to be informed whether the government is considering formulating appropriate legislation and policy directives in order to implement the Basic Principles.

In conclusion, Amnesty International continued to call upon the government to establish an independent and impartial judicial inquiry, to review the issue of disputed killings by security forces with regard to policy matters, legislation, investigative procedures and to ensure conformity with international standards.

(Amnesty International has recently published a paper entitled Human Rights, Concerns in the United Kingdom , which outlines many of our concerns in Northern Ireland . Amnesty International has concluded that a number of practices in Northern Ireland contravene international standards and that safeguards are inadequate to protect the individual's basic human rights while in the custody of the security forces. The organization believes that a wide-ranging inquiry is needed to look at the totality of pre-trial and trial procedures (in particular in the light of the Criminal Evidence (NI) Order 1988, as well as a judicial inquiry into the issue of disputed killings.)

Amnesty International, International Secretariat

1 Easton Street , London WIX 8DJ, United Kingdom