Foster loses bid to avoid court case over Troubles inquests funding logjam

First Minister Arlene Foster is being subjected to a “vexatious” legal challenge over funding for legacy inquests in Northern Ireland, the Attorney General has claimed.

John Larkin QC also told the High Court yesterday that the DUP leader had a veto on the Stormont cabinet discussing plans for securing extra resources to clear a backlog of hearings into Troubles-related killings.

The submissions came as a judge dismissed Mrs Foster’s bid to be removed as a respondent in proceedings brought by the widow of an innocent civilian shot dead along with eight IRA men.

The judge Sir Paul Girvan did, however, narrow the challenge against her to allegations she unlawfully blocked proposals before they reached the Executive committee.

Brigid Hughes is seeking to judicially review the administrations at Stormont and Westminster for failing to release the financial resources necessary to hold a series of historic inquests.

Her husband Anthony died after being unwittingly caught up in the SAS ambush of an IRA unit at Loughgall, Co Armagh, in May

1987.

In an extraordinary move, Mrs Foster (below) was personally joined to the challenge amid claims she has a responsibility for the funding logjam.

Northern Ireland’s Lord Chief Justice Sir Declan Morgan has advanced a blueprint for having all cases dealt with within five years.

With the cost of the plan estimated at around £10m, the Government has said resources will not be released until political consensus is reached on dealing with the past.

Part of the legal challenge involves claims of political discrimination being made against Mrs Foster.

A Press report where she referred to a perceived skewing towards inquests into State killings pointed to a discriminatoFORMER ry approach, according to Mrs Hughes’ lawyers. They contend that reference to innocent victims and killings by paramilitary groups indicated a reliance on political opinion about different categories of cases.

But the Attorney General argued that the decision to have Mrs Foster added to the case in a personal capacity over alleged actions stretching back to March 2016 should be set aside.

He said: “The joining of the former First Minister is not only outrageously out of time, it’s simply vexatious.”

Mr Larkin insisted the holding of inquests was a matter of judicial determination.

The court heard Mrs Foster felt it inappropriate to put the issue on the Executive agenda without an overall package of measures for victims in general. In exchanges with Sir Paul, the Attorney General submitted that politics “at the very highest level” was involved.

During the debate the judge questioned the legal entitlement for any such right to block.

Pressing on with his case, Mr Larkin contended that grounds of challenge against Mrs Foster were unsustainable. Rejecting the claims of discrimination, he stressed that no particular group had been favoured.

Barry Macdonald QC, for Mrs Hughes, insisted Mrs Foster contributed to the collective failure by government through blocking the proposals.

Ruling that Mrs Foster is to remain a respondent for allegedly stopping the issue going before the Stormont Executive, Sir Paul confirmed her application was being dismissed.

The case will now proceed to a full hearing next month.