Crowd backs calls for public inquiry into 1997 murder of GAA official
The home town of a GAA official murdered almost 30 years ago came to a standstill on Friday evening as thousands showed their support for his family's call for a public inquiry.
It comes after the UK Government confirmed that it will seek to appeal to the Supreme Court over a court ruling that ordered it to hold a public inquiry into the killing of Sean Brown.
Mr Brown's family met Tánaiste Simon Harris earlier this week as part of their campaign to see a public inquiry heard.
Friday evening saw people travel from across Ireland, including as far away as Co Kerry, to Bellaghy to take part in a Walk For Truth event from St Mary's Church through the town to the home of Bellaghy Wolfe Tones GAC.
Many wore GAA shirts from their home county as they showed solidarity with the Brown family.
Mr Brown, 61, the then chairman of the club in the Co Londonderry town, was ambushed, kidnapped and murdered by loyalist paramilitaries as he locked the gates of the club in May 1997.
No-one has ever been convicted of his killing.
Preliminary inquest proceedings last year heard that in excess of 25 people had been linked by intelligence to the murder, including several state agents.
It had also been alleged in court that surveillance of a suspect in the murder was temporarily stopped on the evening of the killing, only to resume again the following morning.
Appeal Court judges in Belfast affirmed an earlier High Court ruling compelling the Government to hold a public inquiry.
It said the failure to hold such an inquiry was unlawful.
However, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn says the case involves a key constitutional principle of who should order public inquiries, the Government or the judiciary.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
43 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut
Ms Reeves' £1.25 billion plan unveiled on Monday will see automatic payments worth up to £300 given to pensioners with an income less than £35,000 a year. It followed last year's decision to strip pensioners of the previously universal scheme, unless they claimed certain benefits, such as pension credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments, known as Pip. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' Nadia Whittome (James Manning/PA) The pensions minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions, replied that the numbers of people receiving Pip is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work green paper, the Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so Pip claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the Pip daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future,' the document noted. Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the winter fuel payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on Pip and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' Conservative former work and pensions secretary Esther McVey had earlier asked whether the Chancellor, 'now that she and the Government have got a taste for climbdowns', would 'reverse the equally ridiculous national insurance contribution (Nic) rises, which is destroying jobs, and the inheritance tax changes, which is destroying farms and family businesses'. Mr Bell said: 'This is a party opposite that has learned no lessons whatsoever, that thinks it can come to this chamber, call for more spending, oppose every tax rise and expect to ever be taken seriously again – they will not.' Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey pressed the Government to make changes to the two-child benefit cap, which means most parents cannot claim for more than two children. 'It's the right thing to do to lift pensioners out of poverty, and I'm sure that both he and the Chancellor also agree that it's right to lift children out of poverty,' the Salford MP told the Commons. 'So can he reassure this House that he and the Chancellor are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible?' Mr Bell replied: 'All levers to reduce child poverty are on the table. 'The child poverty strategy will be published in the autumn.' He added: 'If we look at who is struggling most, having to turn off their heating, it is actually younger families with children that are struggling with that. 'So she's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this Government, we cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty.'
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
'Rachel Reeves hopes public gives her credit for listening to winter fuel anger'
Rachel Reeves today tried to turn the page on Labour's biggest mistake so far. Only weeks after the party's landslide election victory, she stunned the country by announcing plans to strip around 10 million pensioners of their winter fuel payments. A Tory aide who served two Chancellors once told me that the winter fuel allowance was at the top of the Treasury hit list offered to No11's new incumbents. Ms Reeves's predecessors didn't fancy picking a fight with pensioners and baulked at being blamed for leaving OAPs struggling to heat their homes. But in the early days in Government, the Chancellor was focused on proving she had an iron grip on the public finances. It was clear from the start that it was a serious error, puncturing the optimism and goodwill from the public who had handed Labour a massive majority. Even senior Government figures acknowledged it had been a mistake but there were fears that they couldn't afford to U-turn - either politically or economically. However it became a running sore for Labour. MPs complained they were being inundated by complaints from constituents and it came up repeatedly on the doorstep in last month's local elections. Unnerved by the surge in support for Reform UK and growing unrest from Labour MPs, Keir Starmer and his Chancellor blinked. Follow our Mirror Politics account on Bluesky here. And follow our Mirror Politics team here - Lizzy Buchan, Mikey Smith, Kevin Maguire, Sophie Huskisson, Dave Burke and Ashley Cowburn. Be first to get the biggest bombshells and breaking news by joining our Politics WhatsApp group here. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you want to leave our community, you can check out any time you like. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Or sign up here to the Mirror's Politics newsletter for all the best exclusives and opinions straight to your inbox. And listen to our exciting new political podcast The Division Bell, hosted by the Mirror and the Express every Thursday. Initially Downing Street suggested we would have to wait until the Budget for the full details, leaving pensioners in the dark about whether they would be eligible. But Ms Reeves gave them hope by confirming an almost complete U-turn, with only the richest OAPs missing out. The Chancellor will take some flak in Westminster for this U-turn. There will be questions over how it's funded and whether the Government is vulnerable to pressure on other unpopular policies. But she'll be hoping that the public gives her credit for listening to their concerns, allowing the Government to draw a line under this sorry episode and shift focus to the positive things it's trying to do.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Christian worker gains final victory against school after it sacked her for LGBT posts
A Christian worker has won her years-long legal battle against a school which sacked her for sharing social media posts about LGBT+ relationships. Kristie Higgs, a Christian mother of two, was fired from her role at Farmor's School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, in 2019 for sharing Facebook posts criticising teaching about LGBT+ relationships in schools. In February, she won a Court of Appeal battle related to her dismissal, with three senior judges finding that the decision to sack her for gross misconduct was 'unlawfully discriminatory' and 'unquestionably a disproportionate response'. The school sought to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court in March, but three justices refused to give the school approval to challenge the decision in the UK's highest court. In a decision published on Monday, Lord Reed, Lord Hamblen and Lady Simler said the school had asked for the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling on four grounds. But they said that the Supreme Court 'does not have jurisdiction' to hear three of the grounds, and the fourth 'does not raise an arguable question of law'. In response to the decision, Mrs Higgs said: 'I am relieved and grateful to the Supreme Court for this common-sense decision. 'Christians have the right to express their beliefs on social media and at other non-work-related settings without fear of being punished by their employer.' 'Censorship is illegal' Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, which supported Mrs Higgs' case, said: 'We welcome the Supreme Court's decision, which brings a decisive closure to this extraordinary case.' She continued: 'The Court of Appeal confirmed, loud and clear, that ideological censorship in the workplace, particularly against sincerely held Christian convictions, is illegal. 'This latest decision from the Supreme Court is further proof that our tireless work at the Christian Legal Centre, in defending so many Christian freedoms cases, has not been in vain.' Mrs Higgs, who worked as a pastoral administrator and work experience manager at the school, shared two posts on a private page under her maiden name in October 2018 to about 100 friends, which raised concerns about relationship education at her son's Church of England primary school. She either copied and pasted from another source or reposted the content, adding her own reference in one post to 'brainwashing our children'. Pupils were to learn about the No Outsiders In Our School programme, a series of books that teach the Equality Act in primary schools. An employment tribunal found in 2020 that while Mrs Higgs' religion was a protected characteristic, her dismissal was lawful, but this decision was overturned by an employment appeal tribunal (EAT) in 2023. But the EAT ruled the case should be sent back to an employment tribunal for a fresh decision, which Mrs Higgs' lawyers challenged in the Court of Appeal as 'unnecessary'. In a judgment, Lord Justice Underhill, sitting with Lord Justice Bean and Lady Justice Falk, ruled in Mrs Higgs' favour in February, stating: 'The dismissal of an employee merely because they have expressed a religious or other protected belief to which the employer, or a third party with whom it wishes to protect its reputation, objects will constitute unlawful direct discrimination within the meaning of the Equality Act.'
