Restriction on naming Stakeknife ‘bizarre', agrees Chief Constable as he calls for greater transparency
The top PSNI officer agreed with the DUP leader Gavin Robinson's suggestion that 'it is bizarre that we're having a discussion about naming' the British Army's top agent inside the Provisional IRA during the Troubles, known to be the now-deceased former head of IRA internal security, Freddie Scappaticci.
Mr Boutcher also warned that 'the lack of information being provided' on legacy cases 'creates conspiracy theories'.
'It's becoming pantomime and affecting the credibility of us as the security forces,' he said.
'I would hope the Secretary of State will see that. But he will be receiving arguments from lawyers saying: you can't name him, because that will have a chilling effect. I would argue strongly that it will not.
'Sometimes, you lose the right to have that sort of voice when you have failed to manage informants and agents properly, when they have behaved in the way they have behaved, which we set out in the Kenova report.
'There has to be a line around national. But we have prevented even uncontroversial information coming out.
'If [naming Stakeknife] doesn't happen, then I think that is the sounding of a bell to legacy not succeeding moving forward.'
Mr Boutcher headed up Operation Kenova, which linked the spy to at least 14 murders and 15 abductions.
However, when the interim report was published in March 2014, it did not confirm Stakeknife's identity, which is known to the PSNI chief.
'I cannot make his name public without official authority,' Mr Boutcher said at that time.
'So far, the Government has refused to give such authority.'
Baroness Nuala O'Loan, the former Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, also gave evidence to the hearing and agreed that it was time to name Stakeknife.
The UK peer argued that the state's failure to provide information was having a negative impact on legacy inquest and used the example of murdered GAA club chairman Sean Brown's family, who 'have been back in court something like 58 times trying to get information'.
'That is a scandal,' she said.
Baroness O'Loan also called on the Labour Government to find a new approach to legacy issues, saying that the low number of cases brought to the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR) 'is indicative of the fact that people don't trust it'.
She said it should set aside a specific budget to deal with legacy issues, 'in particular to ringfence a separate legal legacy budget to cover all aspects of providing a criminal justice system to deal with the past'.
'The reality is our criminal justice system is quite profoundly broken. Rape cases are being listed for 2028 and 2029,' Baroness O'Loan continued.
'For victims, the horror of that situation. For those who are accused and are innocent, unless and until they are found guilty, that is also a terrible situation.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
20 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
John Swinney isn't bothered 'in the slightest' by SNP legal battles... paid for by YOU
John Swinney has been accused of being cavalier with public money after claiming he is not bothered 'in the slightest' about two high-profile law suits against SNP ministers. The First Minister said being sued for apparently ignoring the UK Supreme Court and by Alex Salmond 's widow were 'part of the fabric of government life in Scotland'. Speaking to STV's Scotland Tonight, Mr Swinney refused to comment on the substance of the actions as 'live proceedings' were involved. But asked if he was 'bothered about them', he said: 'Not in the slightest. They're part of the fabric of government life in Scotland, and I've got to deal with them all.' His comments coincided with claims Scotland's public sector has 'squandered' £406million on legal services in just the last three years. Scottish Conservative finance spokesman Craig Hoy said: 'John Swinney might arrogantly be dismissing the prospect of this latest legal action, but he will not be the one footing the bill. 'The SNP and their army of quangos have blown over £400million in legal fees in recent years and the First Minister doesn't seem bothered about wasting yet more taxpayers' money. 'If they finally just implemented the Supreme Court verdict, then at least one of these cases would be avoided.' For Women Scotland, who beat the Scottish Government in court earlier this year, have launched fresh legal action against John Swinney's government Alex Salmond's widow Moira is reviving a £3 million claim her late husband began in 2023 For Women Scotland (FWS) last week took legal action against SNP ministers for failing to enforce April's Supreme Court ruling on gender. The group, whose previous challenges led to the judgment, wants a judge to strike down policies on the housing of trans people in jail and transgender pupils using single-sex school toilets. The Supreme Court ruled biological sex, not gender choice, determines a person's rights under UK equality law. But Mr Swinney has failed to act, claiming he has to wait for updated advice from the UK Equalities and Human Rights Commission. Critics accuse him of playing for time to avoid a row within the SNP before May's Holyrood election. A motion to the SNP conference in October claims the 'reductionist' ruling 'rolls back progress for all women'. It also emerged on Sunday that Alex Salmond's widow Moira is reviving a £3million compensation claim her late husband began in 2023. The ex-First Minister took the action over the Scottish Government's botched 2018 in-house probe into sexual misconduct claims. The investigation was later ruled unlawful, unfair and 'tainted by apparent bias'. Meanwhile, figures from 168 public bodies revealed £406million was spent on legal services over three years. The Scottish Government had the largest bill, at £89million, followed by NHS Scotland at £62million. Tory MSP Stephen Kerr, who obtained the costs under freedom of information, said the total sum was 'staggering' given the state of public services. A government spokesman said: 'The Scottish Government and NHS Scotland are required to take legal advice on a range of issues.'
Times
40 minutes ago
- Times
Nature is not the enemy of housebuilders
The government appears to have gone to war against nature and beauty in its attempt to get Britain building again. We should stop worrying about the environment, get rid of the bugs, spiders and bats and focus instead on what matters: creating more housing, employment and renewable energy. That means prioritising solar farms over wildflowers and faster transport links over forests. The thinking seems to be that these are elitist luxuries we can no longer afford. Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, summed it up when she said last month she cared more about getting young families on to the housing ladder than 'protecting some snails'. She is evidently considering a second planning bill that would make it far harder for environmentalists to hold up infrastructure projects, limit protection for many species and curtail judicial reviews to block projects. Ed Miliband is also determined that his quest for net zero will not be dragged down by farmers being subsidised to grow food locally and create wetlands when they could be installing solar panels. And earlier this year, Angela Rayner removed the word 'beautiful' from the national planning policy framework to speed up construction. • Rachel Reeves to cut 'bats and newts' in boost to developers They have a point. You only have to mention the £100 million 'bat tunnel' for HS2 and everyone agrees it was an egregious waste of money. The green lobby has at times appeared out of control, prioritising hazel dormice over our children's future; the nimbys seem selfish for wanting to preserve their woodlands and views; and, as 40C summers in Europe become the new norm, we need more energy-efficient solutions. Yet does Labour really need to turn nature into the enemy? Why this supposition that in order to grow we have to bulldoze beauty and sacrifice wildlife, or that getting to net zero in 2050 matters more than supporting a green and pleasant, environmentally friendly countryside? Travelling in Uzbekistan last week, a central Asian country whose economy is booming, it was clear in Tashkent that they are determined to backtrack on years of pummelling nature in the Soviet era. They are focused on rebuilding the capital, creating offices and housing for the country's burgeoning population, but also ensuring that the city is covered in trees, parks and neatly tended flower gardens. The result is stunning. The city is shaded from the ferocious sun, there is barely any litter among the flower beds and people want to walk to work and socialise in the greenery in the evenings. In Samarkand, tourists are flocking back as beauty is prioritised. Yet nature and beauty in the UK are increasingly seen as obstacles. Conservation charities insist the 'builders versus blockers' narrative wrongly frames wildlife as being in conflict with economic growth. Bats and great crested newts are a factor in only 3 per cent of planning appeals, they say. The Home Builders Federation claims a lack of planning staff in councils causes worse delays. • Emma Duncan: Planning regulation is bogged down by newts This system isn't helping housebuilders, nor is it protecting the most valuable elements of our landscape. We have lost half of our biodiversity since 1970, according to the most recent State of Nature report, birds, pollinators, micro-organisms and flora bearing the brunt. Native dormice are now threatened with extinction. 'Clean energy' is this government's mantra but dirty rivers may be its heritage, destroyed by untreated sewage and factory farming. Yet ministers appear to care as little as the last lot, despite the Labour manifesto stating that Britain 'is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world'. Ironically, before this government's latest interventions, environmentalists and construction companies had been edging towards consensus. The Wildlife Trusts' chief executive, Craig Bennett, is a surprise supporter of housebuilders, businesses and investors struggling with so many changing and contradictory schemes, such as demanding that housing developments factor in biodiversity net gains (BNG), then scrapping that for small sites, which cover 70 per cent of new builds. 'Thriving ecosystems and wildlife provide multiple co-benefits, promote solutions to climate challenges such as flooding and drought, improve health and wellbeing and create new jobs,' he says. If smaller developments are exempt from BNG, an area the size of 35,000 football pitches of nature-rich planting will be lost. A new report by the think tank Policy Exchange shows that building beautiful, harmonious council estates intertwined with nature is the best way forward. They encourage community pride, discourage crime and are often more cost-effective. The world's first council estate, the Boundary Estate, built in the 1890s in east London, was made up of tree-lined avenues and is, unsurprisingly, still more sought after than grey, dense housing and tower blocks. Nimbys are far less likely to reject any characterful additions that enhance their neighbourhood and provide new green spaces, such as Camley Street Nature Park, once a coal drop between King's Cross and St Pancras but for the past 40 years a haven for birds and insects. Beauty shouldn't be the preserve of rich Cotswolds estates. Great crested newts don't need to be eliminated and ancient woodland hacked down in this government's desire for a great leap forward. Nature is not the enemy; incorporate it into a simplified planning code with high environmental standards and it may be the solution. It could encourage better mental health, boost our listless productivity, prevent nimbyism, counter climate change, promote community adhesion and nurture us all, including the dormice.
ITV News
2 hours ago
- ITV News
'A never-ending nightmare': British woman sexually assaulted on a plane but denied compensation
A woman who was sexually assaulted on a flight to London is challenging Government rules that disqualify her from a compensation scheme. Kelly - who is using a fake name for anonymity - had fallen asleep on a Qatar Airways flight from Doha to London Gatwick in September last year, when she was awoken by the man sitting next to her with his hands down her trousers. Kelly was 24 at the time of the attack. She would later find out she had been assaulted by 66-year-old Momade Jussab. "It felt like a never-ending nightmare" "When I saw his hands, I tried to take them off. I said to him, what are you doing? I said, stop. He said, no, please," Kelly told ITV News. "I tried to take his hands out of my trousers. I used both hands forcefully." Frightened and shaking, Kelly ran to the aeroplane's bathroom. When she explained to a flight attendant what had happened, she was moved to a different seat for the remaining two hours of the flight. "They moved me next to a couple who were sleeping. I stayed up most of the flight. Anyone that walked past, I was scared, panicking," Kelly says. "It felt like I was never going to leave the plane. Honestly, it felt like it was a never ending nightmare. "I was just awake, staring into space, in shock, scared, looking at the couple next to me, thinking maybe they would do something. I was paranoid." Jussab was arrested upon landing, and was sentenced in May to six-and-a-half years in prison, after being found guilty of one count of sexual assault by penetration and two counts of sexual assault. But because the assault took place on a plane not registered in Britain, Kelly has been told she does not qualify for compensation, a decision her lawyers say highlights a serious oversight in the law. "I just want help. I felt like I wasn't heard" Kelly had applied for the government's Criminal Injuries Compensation (CIC) Scheme, which provides financial compensation to individuals who have been physically or mentally injured, or whose close relatives have died, as a result of violent crime in England, Scotland, and Wales. "They rejected my application and they said that it wasn't in a relevant place," says Kelly. "I appealed it and said that I'm a British citizen. He was arrested in the UK, tried in the UK, he's in a UK prison. I don't see why I should miss out on compensation just because it wasn't in the British aircraft. And they rejected it again." Kelly says the experience has left her struggling even more with poor mental health. "I felt like I wasn't heard. Honestly, even though I got justice, I still have to go to therapy. There's only so much the NHS can do, and I want to see a psychiatrist. "I know how bad my mental health is at the moment. I know what I want to do. I know that it requires money, money that I don't have. "I just want help and if I'm compensated, I can feel I can get the help that I need." But she says she feels the government doesn't fully grasp the impact of her ordeal. "I don't think they understand the severity of my case," she says. "All they have said is, I'm sorry this has happened to you, but it wasn't on a British controlled aircraft, so we can't help you." "A gap that needs closing urgently" The Civil Aviation Act was updated in 1996 to ensure criminal acts on foreign planes bound for the UK can be prosecuted in UK criminal courts, which meant that Jussab could be arrested and charged when the plane landed in Gatwick. But victims in these cases, like Kelly, still cannot be compensated. Law firm Leigh Day, which is representing Kelly, has written to Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, urging her to close what it believes is a gap in the law. 'Our client was refused compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation scheme simply because it was a foreign flight and the rules have not been amended in line with the updates to the Civil Aviation Act," says Claire Powell, a solicitor at Leigh Day. 'It is a gap that needs closing urgently and we trust the Justice Secretary will agree, particularly in light of this Government's commitment to addressing violence against women and girls.' A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: 'Our thoughts remain with this victim, and we remain resolute in our mission to halve violence against women and girls in a decade. 'The rules that the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority follows, and the values of payments for injuries, are set by Parliament. Other routes are available for victims to receive support.' "More needs to be done" Kelly told ITV News she is not only fighting for compensation for herself, but also to raise awareness for other women. "I never thought I would go on a plane, fall asleep and wake up to someone sexually assaulting me," she says. She says she wants to see more measures put in place to help women who are victims of similar assaults. "That's why I want to speak out. More needs to be done for women that go through things like this. "This is more for the women who are already not as safe as we want to be. I want them to know that it can happen to you. And as harsh as it sounds, it can. I didn't think it would happen to me."
