Latest news with #publicInquiry
BreakingNews.ie
2 days ago
- Politics
- BreakingNews.ie
State will oppose applications to bring cases over failure to hold Omagh Bombing inquiry
The State will oppose applications by two Omagh bombing survivors seeking to bring lawsuits aimed at compelling the Irish government to establish a public inquiry into the atrocity, the High Court has heard. Emmet Tunney and Shawneen Conway, both survivors of the 1998 dissident republican bombing, say the Government is obliged to establish a public inquiry in circumstances where state authorities allegedly held 'actionable intelligence' relating to the attack. Advertisement A total of 29 people, including Ms Conway's 18-year-old brother Gareth and a mother pregnant with twins, died when a car bomb planted by the Real IRA exploded in the centre of the Co Tyrone town on August 15th, 1998. The survivors, who are seeking to bring separate but similar cases, both point to a judgment of Northern Ireland's High Court, which found that the British and Irish government bore responsibilities 'arising from the cross-Border nature of the attack and the intelligence failings that preceded it'. 'The High Court in Northern Ireland found that there was a real prospect that fresh investigative measures could yield new and significant information regarding the atrocity, including the possibility of preventing it had certain intelligence been acted upon,' the survivors' court papers state. Their cases state that a public inquiry is required to ensure an effective investigation of the atrocity. Advertisement They allege the State's failure to hold such an inquiry is a breach of their rights under the Constitution and under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). According to their court documents, article two of the ECHR requires an 'effective, independent, prompt, and public' investigation in circumstances where state agents knew or ought to have known of a real and immediate risk to life. Articles 40 and 41 of the Constitution require effective investigations of deaths involving potential state failures, their papers say. An independent inquiry into the bombing established by the UK government opened in Omagh in January and is continuing. That inquiry is examining whether the atrocity could have been prevented by UK authorities. Advertisement Ms Conway and Mr Tunney say the Irish government should hold a parallel inquiry. In the High Court this week, Stephen Toal KC, for the survivors with Ruaidhrí Giblin BL and Karl McGuckin BL, moved an application seeking permission to bring the proceedings against the Government, Ireland and the Attorney General. Mr Toal said the State had indicated it would be opposing their application seeking permission to bring the proceedings. Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty said she would hear Mr Toal's applications for permission to bring the proceedings in early November. The judge said the State should be put on notice of the applications. Both survivors are seeking various orders, including one compelling the Government to establish a public inquiry into the bombing, and a court declaration that the Government's failure to establish such an inquiry to date is in breach of their rights. Mr Tunney, of Omagh, Co Tyrone, is represented in the action by Strabane-based firm Roche McBride Solicitors. Ms Conway, from Dungannon, Co Tyrone, is represented by Pa Duffy Solicitors in Dungannon.
Irish Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Irish Times
State to oppose applications to bring cases over failure to hold Omagh bombing inquiry
The State will oppose applications by two survivors of the 1998 Omagh bombing who are seeking to bring lawsuits aimed at compelling the Government to establish a public inquiry into the atrocity, the High Court has heard. Emmet Tunney and Shawneen Conway say the Government is obliged to establish a public inquiry in circumstances where State authorities allegedly held 'actionable intelligence' relating to the attack. A total of 29 people, including Ms Conway's 18-year-old brother Gareth and a woman pregnant with twins, died when a car bomb planted by the Real IRA exploded in the centre of the Co Tyrone town on August 15th, 1998. The survivors, who are seeking to bring separate but similar cases, both point to a judgment of Northern Ireland's High Court which found the British and Irish governments bore responsibilities 'arising from the cross-Border nature of the attack and the intelligence failings that preceded it'. READ MORE 'The High Court in Northern Ireland found that there was a real prospect that fresh investigative measures could yield new and significant information regarding the atrocity, including the possibility of preventing it had certain intelligence been acted upon,' the survivors' court papers state. Their cases argue that a public inquiry is required to ensure an effective investigation of the atrocity. They allege the State's failure to hold such an inquiry is a breach of their rights under the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). According to their court documents, article two of the ECHR requires an 'effective, independent, prompt, and public' investigation in circumstances where state agents knew or ought to have known of a real and immediate risk to life. Articles 40 and 41 of the Constitution require effective investigations of deaths involving potential State failures, their papers say. An independent inquiry into the bombing, established by the UK government, opened in Omagh in January and is continuing. That inquiry is examining whether the atrocity could have been prevented by UK authorities. Ms Conway and Mr Tunney say the Irish Government should hold a parallel inquiry. In the High Court this week, Stephen Toal KC, for the survivors with Ruaidhrí Giblin BL and Karl McGuckin BL, moved an application seeking permission to bring the proceedings against the Government, Ireland and the Attorney General. Mr Toal said the State had indicated it would be opposing their application seeking permission to bring the proceedings. Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty said she would hear Mr Toal's applications for permission to bring the proceedings in early November. The judge said the State should be put on notice of the applications. Mr Tunney, of Omagh, Co Tyrone, is represented in the action by Strabane-based firm Roche McBride Solicitors. Ms Conway, from Dungannon, Co Tyrone, is represented by Pa Duffy Solicitors in Dungannon.
Telegraph
6 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
David Amess's widow claims ‘cover-up' over Prevent failures
The widow of murdered MP Sir David Amess has accused the Government of a 'cover-up' following a review into the Prevent programme's handling of the case. In a letter to Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, Lady Julia Amess described the review as an 'insult to Sir David's memory' and said that questions about the case can only be answered 'by way of a public inquiry'. The Amess family instructed lawyers to scrutinise Independent Prevent Commissioner Lord Anderson KC's report, with lawyers criticising how 'too much investigation ... has been conducted behind closed doors'. Hudgell Solicitors said 'too many doors have been closed when challenging questions have been raised' – highlighting that only one counter-terrorism case officer with first-hand experience of killer Ali Harbi Ali's Prevent referral was spoken to as part of the review. Ali was referred to Prevent seven years before the Islamic State fanatic stabbed the veteran MP at his constituency surgery in Essex in October 2021. He was sentenced to a whole-life order the following year. Lord Anderson's report said 'intensive' efforts have been made to improve processes within Prevent, but the 'jury is out' on some of the changes. It also said Ali was described as a ' great person ' by a counter-terrorism case officer shortly before his case was dropped by Prevent. Ms Cooper previously wrote to the Amess family, in which she said she realised the 'seriousness' of the failings in Sir David's case and that she hoped the family found Lord Anderson's report to be 'thorough and considered'. But in her letter to Ms Cooper, Lady Amess said: 'I have to say that, once again, my family has been disrespected and insulted by the Government. 'Your letter implies that you have our best interests at heart – which could not be further from the truth.' 'Whole sorry saga is a cover-up' Lady Amess continued: 'As you and the Prime Minister requested, we met with Lord Anderson during the review process. From my point of view, it was a very pleasant meeting with a man who was given a job to do and would do it to the best of his ability. 'However, it was absolutely clear to me at the time that he would be unable to give the answers we are seeking. 'He did not have the authority to 'dig below the surface' and find out exactly what happened, who is responsible for the failings (it appears there are several unidentified people) and what will be done to somehow ease the pain and suffering we are still experiencing because the truth is not being told. 'One can only conclude that this whole sorry saga is a cover-up.' She added: 'We should have been taken under the wing of the Government, cared for sympathetically and shown a little compassion. Instead, we have been treated disgracefully. 'It is an insult to Sir David's memory and, as I said during our meeting, I will fight until my dying day for my husband, our children and their children.' 'Deeply unsatisfactory' Solicitor Neil Hudgell said answers to the Amess family's questions regarding Ali's referral to Prevent 'remain deeply unsatisfactory'. He said: 'Far too much investigation into Sir David's murder and the interactions between Prevent and Ali Harbi Ali has been conducted behind closed doors, and too many doors have been closed when challenging questions have been raised in search of accountability and transparency. 'Lord Anderson did not interview any other member of the Prevent panel, which dealt with the Ali case, other than the one counter-terrorism case officer, who only consented to being interviewed on strict conditions. 'Even the coroner declined to engage with Lord Anderson, citing judicial independence. 'Answers to important questions with regard to his referral, the lack of proper intervention, follow-up sessions and review remain deeply unsatisfactory.' He added: 'A statutory public inquiry is needed as only this forum can compel witnesses to appear and give evidence under oath, and be questioned as to what was known, and why decisions were made.'
Irish Times
22-07-2025
- Politics
- Irish Times
Omagh bombing survivor wants High Court to compel State to hold public inquiry into atrocity
Two people directly affected by the Omagh bombing want the High Court to compel the Irish government to establish a public inquiry into the atrocity. Emmet Tunney, who survived the 1998 dissident republican bombing, says the Government is obliged to establish a public inquiry in circumstances where state authorities allegedly held 'actionable intelligence' relating to the attack. Mr Tunney's case states that a public inquiry is required to ensure an effective investigation of the atrocity. He alleges the State's failure to hold such an inquiry is a breach of his rights under the Constitution and under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). According to Mr Tunney's court documents, article two of the ECHR requires an 'effective, independent, prompt, and public' investigation in circumstances where state agents knew or ought to have known of a real and immediate risk to life. READ MORE Articles 40 and 41 of the Constitution require effective investigations of deaths involving potential state failures, his papers say. Shawneen Conway, whose 18-year-old brother Gareth was killed in the bombing, is seeking to bring an action similar to Mr Tunney's, the High Court heard on Tuesday. A total of 29 people, including a mother pregnant with twins, died and hundreds were injured when a car bomb planted by the Real IRA exploded in the centre of the Co Tyrone town on August 15th, 1998. An independent inquiry into the bombing established by the UK government opened in Omagh in January and is continuing. That inquiry is examining whether the atrocity could have been prevented by UK authorities. In the High Court on Tuesday, Ruaidhrí Giblin, for Mr Tunney, sought an early date for his application seeking the court's permission to bring the case. Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty said she would hear Mr Tunney's and Ms Conway's applications for court permission next week. Mr Tunney, from Omagh, Co Tyrone, is seeking an order compelling the Government to establish a public inquiry into the bombing and he wants a court declaration that the Government's failure to establish such an inquiry to date is in breach of his rights. He wants to bring his case against the Government, Ireland and the Attorney General. His case claims some of the perpetrators of the bombing are believed to have operated within the Republic of Ireland. He alleges there were failures in intelligence sharing and co-operation between Irish and UK authorities before the bombing. Authorities in the Republic may have had prior knowledge of the Real IRA's planning, his documents claim. Mr Tunney also argues an Irish government inquiry is required in circumstances where there are limitations on the jurisdiction of the UK government's inquiry. For example, he says, the UK government cannot make findings as to whether Irish authorities are culpable for a failure to supply information relating to the bombing. In the UK Omagh bombing inquiry, its chairman, Lord Turnbull, heard arguments over the last two days regarding applications from some survivor and family groups seeking to be represented by special advocates. They said their interests should be represented in closed hearings and they raised a risk of damage to confidence in the inquiry if they were not. However, a lawyer for the UK government said no statutory public inquiry has had special advocates to date and there was no justification to have them in this case. Katherine Grange KC also contended no provision was made for such appointments in the 2005 Inquiries Act and she cautioned around avoiding unnecessary costs. At the conclusion of the hearings around special advocates on Tuesday, Lord Turnbull said the issue raised is 'important and interesting'. He will provide a written decision 'in due course'. – Additional reporting PA
Telegraph
21-07-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Bishop who criticised Tories to lead Orgreave inquiry
Labour has appointed a bishop who has been critical of the Tories to lead a public inquiry into the 'Battle of Orgreave'. Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, confirmed that the inquiry would look at events surrounding the clashes between police and miners at the Orgreave coking plant in South Yorkshire in June 1984, when Margaret Thatcher was in power. She announced it would be chaired by Dr Pete Wilcox, the Bishop of Sheffield. Five years ago, Dr Wilcox criticised Boris Johnson on social media after his adviser Dominic Cummings was accused of breaking Covid rules with a trip to Barnard Castle. He also put his name to an open letter urging against a no-deal Brexit in 2019. Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former business secretary, said: 'A hand-picked selection of Lefties will inevitably produce a biased report. Taxpayers' money will be used for the propaganda purposes of the Labour movement. 'This is a bung to the Left, which will no doubt attack the police who bravely did their job and stood up against mob violence.' In his Twitter post in May 2020, Dr Wilcox wrote: I don't usually tweet politics, and I have carefully steered clear during the pandemic. But tonight I must say: the PM & his cabinet are undermining the trust of the electorate and the risks to life are real. — Pete Wilcox (@PeteWilcox1564) May 24, 2020 The no-deal Brexit letter said: 'Seeing the evidence of division in every part of England, we are deeply concerned about political polarisation and language that appears to sanction hate crime. The reframing of the language of political discourse is urgent, especially given the abuse and threats levelled at MPs doing their job.' The inquiry, expected to launch in the autumn, will investigate the events surrounding Orgreave clashes, which resulted in 120 injuries. A total of 95 picketers were arrested and initially charged with rioting and violent disorder, but all charges were later dropped after police evidence was discredited. The inquiry will be statutory, with the appropriate powers to compel people to provide information where necessary. Dr Wilcox said: 'I am extremely grateful to the Home Secretary for the opportunity to chair this inquiry and for the support I shall be given in doing so. I do not underestimate the weight of expectation or the significance of the task. 'I look forward to engaging with stakeholders in the coming weeks over the draft terms of reference, and to working with the government to identify experts to support me on the independent panel. 'I expect the panel to begin its work in the autumn, and we will endeavour to deliver an inquiry which is thorough and fair, and which will uncover what happened at Orgreave as swiftly as possible.'
