Omagh Bombing Inquiry warned of confidence risk if special advocate request refused

ITV News

4 days ago

There is a risk of damage to confidence in the Omagh Bombing Inquiry if the bereaved families are refused their request for a special advocate for closed hearings, it has been argued.
The families say a special advocate will be able to represent their interests in closed hearings where evidence is deemed sensitive, including in terms of national security.
The probe is examining whether the 1998 atrocity in the Co Tyrone town could have been prevented.
Some 29 people, including a woman pregnant with twins, were killed when the Real IRA exploded a car bomb on a busy Saturday afternoon in Omagh.
The inquiry is sitting this week in Belfast to hear arguments over the application for special advocates for the survivors and bereaved families.
Hugh Southey KC, acting for a number of survivors and bereaved families, also contended former chief constable Sir Ronnie Flanagan would appear to be at 'an advantage' over them.
He also raised that counsel for the inquiry would 'have to look after the interests of a number of people who are excluded from the closed proceedings, who have potentially quite conflicting interests'.
'Everybody thinks that the inquiry is capable of doing a good job. Everybody thinks the counsel to the inquiry are experienced in this field. Everybody thinks they're very well qualified. Everybody thinks they're very diligent, but we need the second tier of representation,' he added.
'Everyone recognises that large key parts of this process are likely to be closed …. it's frustrating for the individuals, because they want to know the truth. They want to know that whatever findings may be made are reliable.
'They would normally be able to do that in one sense, by attending, by viewing, by making sure that they see what questions are asked.
'They can follow the process and then have confidence in the outcome, when things go into closed they they can't do that.
'But if they have someone who they have confidence in, who is present, who is, effectively, saying there is no problem here, that adds to confidence in the process, particularly in circumstances where, as I say, the state parties are present, the state parties will have that advantage.'
Ian Skelt KC, acting for Sir Ronnie, said his client is 'entirely sympathetic' to the requests of the families and acknowledges why they seek and why they feel that there is a need for the appointment of special advocates.
He said Sir Ronnie does not seek a special advocate for himself, but acknowledged that having been chief constable at the time of the bombing, he had the authority at that time to view much of the closed material.
However, Mr Skelt said if Sir Ronnie is excluded from the closed processes, he 'may have to ask for some person to represent his interest in closed process beyond the assistance that would be given by the inquiry legal team'.
Alan Kane KC, representing another group of survivors and bereaved families, said they would like their own special advocate for closed hearings.
'Their wish would be to see all the relevant evidence after 26 years, however if there must be closed material, then we say that it should, where possible, be kept to a minimum, and if judgments are to be made then close calls must fall on the side of disclosure rather than being hidden from our families' view,' he said.
'They view a special advocate not as some special bonus or as a challenge to the inquiry legal team but as something that should be granted as they see it, as an additional assistance to them in shining light on any material which is withheld as closed by the state authorities.
'They have that legitimate interest we say, and that certainly is a matter of not only public confidence but in particular the confidence of the families.'
Fintan McAleer, who represents another group of survivors and bereaved families, said they endorsed the submissions made so far.
Inquiry chair Lord Turnbull asked Mr McAleer about a point made in written submissions that the 'deep mistrust and suspicion of the state that exists in this country will never be fully allayed unless it's confirmed that every single document and piece of information is placed into the open'.
'Why do you tell me that every single document, piece of information needs to be placed into the open,' the chair asked.
Mr McAleer responded saying they respect the powers and the processes of the inquiry, but they wanted to reflect the effect of scepticism based on the experience of the core participants.
'The series of revelations over the years since the bomb have served to undermine their trust in the state,' he added.
'We're simply trying to convey the aspiration of the core participants we represent is that this inquiry should be in public in everything that it does, we accept there is a limitation on that, and that paragraph is an attempt to address that.'
Meanwhile Michael Mansfield KC, who represents the family of the late campaigner Laurence Rush, whose wife Elizabeth was killed in the bomb, said they are not asking for a special advocate to be appointed for them.
They voiced concern about the possibility of delay to proceedings.
The hearings continue.