01-05-2025
False statements provided in legal row over exhuming body of murdered IRA man
Counsel representing the Department for Communities claimed the misleading information related to the removal of a headstone at the grave of Kevin McGuigan
The Funeral of former IRA man Kevin McGuigan in 2015 (Photo: Arthur Allison/Pacemaker)
False statements were provided in a legal battle over attempts to exhume the body of a murdered ex-IRA prisoner, the High Court heard today.
Counsel representing the Department for Communities claimed the misleading information related to the removal of a headstone at the grave of Kevin McGuigan.
McGuigan, 53, was shot dead in front of his wife Dolores at their home in the Short Strand, east Belfast back in August 2015.
Republicans were suspected of sanctioning the father-of-nine's murder amid disputed claims he was involved in the killing of former IRA commander Gerard 'Jock' Davison in the Markets area of the city three months previously.
Kevin McGuigan
Today's News in 90 seconds - Thursday, May 1
McGuigan is currently buried in a plot owned by his mother at Belfast City Cemetery.
But his widow wants his remains exhumed for interment in the same grave as their late daughter.
In August 2021, the Department for Communities turned down a request to be allowed to move the body.
The decision was taken after the murder victim's mother refused to consent to the exhumation.
Revised policy guidance states that without agreement from the owner, a grave can only be opened in exceptional circumstances.
Mrs McGuigan, as her husband's nearest surviving relative, is seeking to judicially review the Department's determination.
She alleges that the refusal breaches her entitlement to private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
In one statement she described the 'devastating impact' of her husband's shooting and being unable to take part in the decision-making process about his burial.
The couple's terminally ill daughter made a request to her grandmother to be buried with her father before she died, it was alleged.
Mrs McGuigan has claimed a failure to properly balance her rights against the property rights of her mother-in-law.
But in court today Tony McGleenan KC, for the Department, argued that her case involved 'material misrepresentations' about who moved a headstone at the current burial site.
Based on further affidavits lodged as part of the challenge, he contended: 'There has been a breach in the duty of candour… it is beyond dispute that false statements have been presented to the court and the Department.'
In detailed submissions the barrister insisted the burial row should have been determined by the Chancery Court rather than subjected to a judicial review.
'The case has been brought forward on a false premise,' he said.
Part of the case centred on issues over who holds exclusive rights to the current plot.
Mr McGleenan suggested issues could be resolved if an 'incredibly elaborate factual account' of an alleged conversation about handing over ownership proved to be correct.
'If the applicant has exclusive rights of burial it unlocks the process, and if the council consents an exhumation would potentially be open under the policy,' he told the court.
Rejecting the alleged breach of Article 8, counsel stressed there was no absolute policy of refusing all bids to relocate bodies.
He added: 'The Department will look at it on a case by case basis, even where you don't have exclusive rights of burial.'
The hearing continues.
