logo
Blair administration failed to extradite Irish terrorist wanted over MP's murder

Blair administration failed to extradite Irish terrorist wanted over MP's murder

Telegraph17-04-2025

The Blair government moved too slowly to extradite a fugitive Republican terrorist wanted in connection with the murder of an MP, newly declassified documents reveal.
Officials admitted 'the bird has flown' after failing to act quickly enough to extradite Harry 'Basher' Flynn, the convicted terrorist gunrunner.
Flynn was named in court in the 1980s as chief of staff for the Irish National Liberation Army (INLA), and is believed to have been a member since its creation in 1975 as a rival to the IRA.
He has been wanted in relation to the assassination of Airey Neave, one of Margaret Thatcher's closest confidantes.
Neave was Margaret Thatcher's shadow secretary for Northern Ireland and during the Second World War had been the first British prisoner of war escapee from Colditz Castle.
The 63-year-old was killed on March 30 1979, when a bomb planted under his Vauxhall Cavalier exploded as it left the House of Commons underground car park.
In 1975, Flynn was charged with stealing £3,500 in an armed bank robbery in Belfast but he tunnelled out of jail before his trial and continued to be listed as 'unlawfully at large' by Northern Ireland's prison service into the 21st-century.
After escaping from Maze Prison, he was caught five years later while rioting about hunger strikes outside the British Embassy in Dublin.
However, an extradition attempt failed. In 1986, Flynn was jailed for five years in France for illegally importing £70,000 of weapons including 100 light anti-tank weapons, 40 Kalashnikov rifles, three machine-guns and two mortars.
Britain tried to extradite him again in 1987, but failed as his crime was deemed 'political'.
Flynn, 71, now runs the Celts Well pub in Santa Ponsa, Majorca, where the INLA's emblem and memorabilia glorifying republican terrorists are on display.
Foreign Office papers released at the National Archives show that officials missed a third chance to drag him back to face justice from the Balearic island in the late 1990s.
Flynn was arrested in mid-July 1997, prompting an urgent missive to the Foreign Office from Madrid-based diplomat John Dew, who received the news from the consulate in Palma.
On July 15, he wrote: 'Flynn came to the consulate's attention recently when he was arrested after hitting a musician on the hand (drink having been taken).
'He is still in custody awaiting trial. The local police regard him as somewhat unstable. He allegedly hangs around an Irish haunt in Majorca called the Celts Bar in Calvia.'
Crown solicitors and the DPP in Northern Ireland were consulted, and officials found no theoretical barrier to extradition or statute of limitations on the robbery or escape offences, but the process did not move quickly enough.
David Brighty, Britain's ambassador in Madrid, wrote to the Foreign Office again on Aug 13, in a somewhat exasperated tone, to say that Flynn had been released after paying a large surety.
He said Flynn had been released ten days previously, after paying a Palma court some two million pesetas, about £10,000 after the money was brought to the island by a bagman from Dublin.
'The bird has flown'
Brighty said the consul in Palma had 'not felt able to make too many direct inquiries, since Flynn was using an Irish passport and was seen by the Spanish as being an Irish National'.
He added: 'It looks as if the bird has flown. If there were thought that we wished to take advantage of his detention, then we seem to have reacted pretty slowly to John Dew's teleletter of 15 July, which clearly signalled the opportunity.'
A memo circulated in London said that officials would have to ask the secretary of state if they wished to 'seek extradition given that we have already lost on two occasions and that a further court hearing may be an occasion for us to be accused of terrible things with little chance of rebuttal.'
'Assuming that we agree we should seek the return of Flynn,' an official wrote. 'I attach a draft submission to the secretary of state.'
A handwritten note then added: 'Not issued. Harry Flynn left the jurisdiction on 3 August. NFA for the moment.'
The identity of the musician and the outcome of the trial are not contained in the papers.
Flynn still runs the Celts Well bar and in 2019 declined to comment when approached by the Telegraph at his pub in Majorca.
The same year Flynn was named in a book by Patrick Bishop, a historian, as a founding member of the INLA who would probably 'never be brought to justice' for acts committed during the Troubles.
Flynn is believed to have lived in Santa Ponsa since the 90s in an apartment near the Celts Well.
At the height of fighting between the IRA and INLA he became a target of the former as a 'godfather' of the latter.
He survived an assassination attempt in Dublin in 1983 and another later shooting.
The INLA, which Flynn was thought to have joined in 1975, declared a ceasefire after the Good Friday Agreement.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Meet the Press NOW — June 11
Meet the Press NOW — June 11

NBC News

timean hour ago

  • NBC News

Meet the Press NOW — June 11

Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, responds to President Trump's decision to send troops to Los Angeles amid ongoing protests over the administration's immigration enforcement actions. NBC News National Political Correspondent Steve Kornacki analyzes the New Jersey gubernatorial primary results, setting the stage for a contest between Republican Jack Ciattarelli and Democrat Mikie Sherrill. Francesca Chambers, Ameshia Cross and T.W. Arrighi weigh in on how the public is responding to the 11, 2025

The treaty Gibraltar wants, for the future we all need
The treaty Gibraltar wants, for the future we all need

Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Telegraph

The treaty Gibraltar wants, for the future we all need

For over five years, Gibraltar has been at the centre of one of the most complex, technical, and geopolitically sensitive negotiations undertaken by the United Kingdom and the European Union since Brexit. The process has consumed me. It has occupied close to half of my time in elected office, taken over almost every waking hour of the last five years, and, in truth, deprived the people of Gibraltar of their Chief Minister in the way they are used to having him, that is, from fixing housing and parking complaints to defending their sovereignty in the international arena. For much longer than I would have wanted, I have been behind closed doors, in physical or virtual boardrooms, working through the details of a document that will shape the next generation of our people. It has been a relentless, exhausting endeavour. Throughout this time, the UK and Gibraltar teams have worked together seamlessly, 'hand in glove', without a flash of daylight between us. We have worked in close partnership with both Conservative and Labour prime ministers and foreign secretaries; from Dominic Raab, Liz Truss and James Cleverly to David Cameron and now David Lammy. What we have negotiated is not the product of fragmented agendas, but the position of a unified British family determined to find a solution worthy of our people. Without a treaty, Gibraltar could be staring down the barrel of a hard border, marked by endless queues, disrupted supply chains, and a deeply uncertain future for many of our businesses. Our hospitals and elderly care homes would face chronic understaffing, and the surrounding region would suffer the almost certain loss of employment for many of the 15,000 cross-border workers who depend on Gibraltar's economy to support their families. The services we deliver to our people would all come under strain. Our public finances would be pushed to the brink. The self-governing Gibraltar we have built would be diminished, replaced by something poorer, more isolated, more inward-looking, and ultimately less able to thrive as a proud, British European Territory. Instead, we now stand at the threshold of something remarkable, and not just for Gibraltar, but also for the United Kingdom, for Spain, and for Europe and our people. Something bold. Something forward looking and hopeful. Something that finally breaks free of the negative inertia that has defined too much of our recent past. Unlocking potential across borders This is politics at its most elevated. The service-led principle of working for our people's benefit and not the performative personal antagonism that too often infects public life. Real, hard graft that overcomes challenges to deliver progress. This is the kind of result our people demand when they voice distrust and decry the political 'establishment'. Our Spanish and EU counterparts, for their part, have brought to the table a seriousness of purpose that also reflects the gravity of the moment. They, too, have recognised that this treaty is not merely about fluidity of movement, but about unlocking human and economic potential across borders. Make no mistake: the treaty that is now within reach is not one that the Gibraltarians have been forced to accept. Our people voted for us to have a mandate to turn our New Year's Eve agreement of 2020 into a UK/EU agreement/treaty. So we say 'yes' to this agreement, but not because we don't know how to say 'no' when we have to. We did so, emphatically, in 2002, when we triggered a referendum to reject Jack Straw's proposal of joint sovereignty with Spain, and I am just as adamant today that this treaty will not in any way compromise British sovereignty over Gibraltar. That will be set out, black upon white, in the treaty when it is published. It is a legal undertaking given by both sides in clear and unequivocal terms. So to be clear: in this treaty we have not ceded any control of Gibraltar to any authority. Just like today, only Gibraltar will decide who enters Gibraltar – exactly as we agreed in 2020 when Dominic Raab was foreign secretary and Boris Johnson was prime minister. This treaty unleashes the potential to usher in a new era. One in which we move beyond the tired narratives of the past on constant sovereignty disputes, towards a future defined by hope, cooperation and shared prosperity. It will pave the way for better jobs, more investment and lasting stability for Gibraltar and the wider region. It can deliver more harmonious human relations and a better quality of life for all our people. When you read it, I ask that you to look up from the pages of this treaty and see that better reality as it peers back at us from the future. This will be the treaty Gibraltar wants. It will be a treaty the UK and the EU can be proud of. And it will be a treaty that will propel us all to the better future politicians are elected to deliver. When the time comes, back Gibraltar and its proudly British people by backing the Gibraltar treaty.

Why Trump could be the X factor in New Jersey: From the Politics Desk
Why Trump could be the X factor in New Jersey: From the Politics Desk

NBC News

time2 hours ago

  • NBC News

Why Trump could be the X factor in New Jersey: From the Politics Desk

Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. In today's edition, Steve Kornacki looks ahead to the general election in New Jersey after last night's gubernatorial primaries. Peter Nichols previews this weekend's military parade in Washington, which occurs against the backdrop of immigration protests around the country. And Andrea Mitchell examines the ripple effects of the new travel ban. — Adam Wollner The Trump factor looms over New Jersey's newly set race for governor By Steve Kornacki The matchup for New Jersey's gubernatorial election is set, but looming over the contest will be a name that won't be on any ballot: Donald Trump. Rep. Mikie Sherrill, who secured the Democratic nomination in Tuesday's primary, is already running ads that attack Republican Jack Ciattarelli for his ties to the president. Ciattarelli, who was also the GOP's nominee in 2021, romped to victory in his party's primary after successfully cultivating Trump's support. In focusing on Trump, Democrats have history on their side. New Jersey voters have a strong tendency to elect governors from the party that doesn't control the White House. This has been the case in all but two races over the past four decades. Plus, Democrats have run this playbook successfully in New Jersey before. Eight years ago, during Trump's first term, Gov. Phil Murphy scored a 14-point win over Republican Kim Guadagno. Murphy sought to tie Guadagno to Trump, whose approval rating in New Jersey that fall stood at just 33%. (Murphy was also aided by the cratering popularity of outgoing Republican Gov. Chris Christie.) Republicans are counting on the Trump factor playing differently this time around. And, at least for now, there are some key variables they can point to with optimism. One is the result of last year's presidential race, when Trump lost New Jersey by 6 points to Kamala Harris. That was a far cry from his 16-point loss in 2020 and his 14-point defeat in 2016. From the outset of the 2017 gubernatorial race, it was obvious that Trump would be a major electoral liability for the GOP. That's not as clear this time around. In fact, a PIX11/Emerson College poll conducted a few weeks ago showed Trump with a 47% job approval rating in New Jersey. That's far higher than he fared during the 2017 campaign, or for that matter, at any point during his first term. It's also higher than the 40% approval rating for Murphy, who is term-limited and provides Ciattarelli with his own opportunity to tie his opponent to an unpopular leader. There's also some history Republicans can point to. Democrats have controlled the New Jersey governorship for two consecutive terms now, with Sherrill seeking to make it three. This is the fifth time since 1981 that one of the two parties has tried for a third straight term. They all failed. Bridget Bowman and Ben Kamisar have five key takeaways from Tuesday's results. Adam Noboa breaks down how each of the candidates in the crowded Democratic field fared on their home turf. Julie Tsirkin, Olympia Sonnier and Bridget explore how Ciattarelli is now attempting to pivot to the general election. By Peter Nicholas President Donald Trump is getting the parade he wanted showcasing America's military power — but he'll also be getting mass protests exposing the nation's partisan divisions. The tanks and artillery launchers rolling through Washington on Saturday will honor the Army's 250th anniversary, which falls on the day Trump turns 79. But in Washington and in all 50 states, organizers are scheduled to stage protests that could dwarf the parade in size. A coalition of pro-democracy, labor and liberal activists is arranging a full day of counterprogramming to make the case that Trump is hijacking the Army celebration to venerate himself. The parade is happening at a fraught moment when Trump has drawn the military — among the nation's most trusted institutions — into a tense standoff in Los Angeles over his aggressive efforts to deport people living in the United States illegally. The Trump administration this week activated about 700 Marines to help quell demonstrations over his immigration enforcement methods, despite warnings from California officials that he is inflaming the situation. ICE is preparing to deploy its Special Response Teams to five cities run by Democratic leaders, according to two sources familiar with the planning of the future operations. The Trump administration is telling immigration judges — who report to the executive branch and are not part of the independent judiciary — to dismiss pending cases as a tactic for speeding up arrests. During an interview with NBC's 'Nightly News' anchor Tom Llamas, White House border czar Tom Homan said that protests in Los Angeles are making immigration raids more 'difficult' and more 'dangerous.' Texas GOP Gov. Greg Abbott said he'll deploy the National Guard across the state 'to ensure peace and order' ahead of a planned protest in San Antonio. California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom warned that 'democracy is under assault' in a speech blasting Trump's immigration tactics. A federal grand jury indicted Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., on charges stemming from a confrontation with law enforcement at an ICE detention center in Newark last month. The way Trump has responded to protests in California is very different than how he treated the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. By Andrea Mitchell Little noticed amid the uproar over the ICE raids in Los Angeles this week is the imposition of a travel ban 2.0 — a retooled version of President Donald Trump's first-term policy, modified to avoid legal challenges. 'We want to keep bad people out of our country,' Trump said. The last time around, the Trump White House had to rewrite the proposed ban three times before it passed Supreme Court muster. This time, the administration released fact sheets to show they were singling out countries whose citizens had high rates of overstaying their visas or don't properly screen their citizens for terrorism, not because most of the 12 countries banned are in Africa or the Middle East — prompting accusations of racial motivation, which would be unconstitutional. While not facing immediate legal challenges, the decision to bar travelers from Afghanistan in particular is outraging many U.S. veterans, including Trump supporters, who say they could not have survived the war without their Afghan translators. They say the U.S. is abandoning its Afghan allies and their families, who are being attacked, imprisoned and, in some cases, tortured by the Taliban for their past association with the U.S. Shawn VanDiver, president of #AfghanEvac, a coalition of U.S. veterans and advocacy groups, told me: 'The Taliban has made it very clear through their actions, not their words, what's going to happen to them. We get photos and videos every week of people being hunted down and killed.' We met an Afghan man who worked as a translator with the U.S. military for seven years who we can't identify without putting his family at risk. He got a special visa to come to the U.S, became a citizen and enlisted in the Marines to return to Afghanistan for another tour in Helmand Province. He spent years trying to bring his siblings and aging parents to the U.S. from Afghanistan to escape retaliation. They were approved last December and told to prepare to travel within days. Now the travel ban has shut the door. He told me when Trump announced the ban, 'For the first week, I couldn't go to work. I laid in bed, I was shocked for a week.' He added, 'I want to see my parents. They're getting old and I feel so bad. I cannot forgive myself if they pass and I can't see them.' He blames himself. But critics of the travel ban say it's the U.S. that went back on its word — something they warn future allies will remember when America wants their help.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store