144
Europe and Central Asia
Summary of Amnesty International’s Concerns in the Region, January – June 2007
the Force Research Unit (FRU), which had
actively colluded with Loyalist paramilitaries
in targeting people, including Patrick
Finucane, for assassination. It found
“collusion, the wilful failure to keep records,
the
absence
of
accountability,
the
withholding of intelligence and evidence,
and the extreme of agents being involved in
murder.” However, the full findings of the
Stevens III investigation, like those of the
two previous Stevens investigations, have
never been made public.
In 2003, the ECtHR ruled that “proceedings
following the death of Patrick Finucane
failed to provide a prompt and effective
investigation
into
the
allegations
of
collusion by security personnel”, and that
there had therefore been a violation of
Article 2 ECHR.
In the information that the UK government
provided to the Committee of Ministers
during its latest examination of the case,
the UK authorities contended that the
Stevens III investigation had given full
effect to the Court’s judgment in this case.
They pointed to the fact that a number of
files were submitted by the Stevens team
to the Prosecution Service in Northern
Ireland in April 2003, for them to consider
whether any further prosecutions should be
brought (see section below). They also
reminded
the
Committee
that
the
government had taken steps to initiate a
new inquiry into the death of Patrick
Finucane, to be held under the Inquiries Act
2005.
The
UK
government
further
contended that “in those cases in which
Article 2 [ECHR] is engaged, the [Inquiries]
Act is capable of being used to hold an
inquiry that will discharge or contribute to
the discharge of the state’s obligations
under that article to provide an effective
official investigation.”
However, by the end of the period under
review, the UK government had yet to
establish any inquiry. AI continued to
denounce the prospect of an inquiry into
the Finucane case held under the Inquiries
Act as a sham.
Amnesty International
Decision
by
the
Northern
Irish
prosecuting authorities on Stevens III
investigation material
In June, shortly after the Committee of
Ministers had adopted the above-mentioned
interim resolution, the Director of Public
Prosecutions for Northern Ireland (DPP)
announced that no further prosecutions
would be brought against any individual on
the basis of the evidence uncovered by the
Stevens
III
investigation.
The
announcement came following the review
by
the
Northern
Irish
prosecuting
authorities of the material submitted by the
Stevens III investigation.
AI condemned the DPP’s decision, and in
particular, expressed concern that the
announcement had been made after an
unconscionable delay -- more than four
years after receipt by the prosecuting
authorities of many individual files from the
Stevens III investigation (see AI Index:
EUR 45/010/2007).
Following the DPP’s decision the UK Ministry
of Defence (MoD) stated to AI: “We
welcome the decision. Soldiers have been
criticised for long enough and should be left
to get on with their lives. The MoD has
cooperated fully with the Stevens inquiries”.
The Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister), Bertie
Ahern, stated:
It is disappointing that the Public
Prosecution Service of Northern
Ireland has found there is insufficient
evidence at this time for further
prosecutions arising out of the third
Stevens report on collusion between
loyalist
paramilitaries
and
the
security forces…. The finding does
not alter the need for an independent
inquiry and to allay any other
concerns surrounding this case …. It
is the [Irish] Government’s view that
the finding adds to the case for an
independent inquiry.
The PSNI told AI that it had noted “the
statement
released
by
the
Public
Prosecution Service. Some of the cases
mentioned in the statement continue to
AI Index: EUR 01/010/2007
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents