No ‘blank cheque’ for legacy cases, court told

THE State cannot be under a legal onus to provide a “blank cheque” for legacy inquests at the expense of all other services in Northern Ireland, the High Court has heard.

Counsel for the Department of Justice (DoJ) argued that human rights legislation should not require funding all outstanding tribunals if the costs meant everything else was “brought to a halt”.

Peter Coll QC advanced an extreme, hypothetical scenario in countering a challenge brought by the widow of an innocent civilian shot dead along with eight IRA men.

He said: “Hospitals would have to be closed, schools closed, lights turned off — all to fund legacy inquests at the exclusion of everything else.

“That simply cannot be what the European court would expect.”

Brigid Hughes is seeking to judicially review the governments in London and Belfast for failing to release the funds necessary to hold a series of tribunals into Troubles killings.

Her husband, Anthony, died after being unwittingly caught up in the SAS ambush of an IRA unit at Loughgall in May 1987.

Although the Stormont House Agreement includes a £150m package to deal with all legacy issues, the Government has said financial resources will not be released until political consensus is reached on dealing with the past.

Proceedings have been issued Brigid Hughes with friends outside the High Court

against the Secretary of State, the Stormont Executive and former First Minister Arlene Foster personally due to her alleged responsibility for the logjam.

It is claimed that in 2016 she unlawfully blocked a paper on bidding for inquest funding before it could be discussed by cabinet colleagues.

Those proposals, drawn up by the DoJ, came after Lord Chief Justice, Sir Declan Morgan, put up a plan to have a backlog of cases dealt with within five years.

Lawyers for Mrs Hughes insist Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights imposes a legal obligation to ensure the inquests are held.

Putting forward the department’s case, Mr Coll insisted responsibility for managing inquests lies with the coroner.

He also told the judge, Sir Paul Girvan, that Parliament never intended to put bodies responsible for funding in a “financial straightjacket” with an absolute duty to provide money.

Instead, he submitted, requirements must be balanced against demands from elsewhere.

Mr Coll said: “The argument put forward by the applicant is that if Article 2 is engaged it’s just a question of a blank cheque.

“The world doesn’t work like that and the law doesn’t work like that in domestic terms, nor does it work like that in Strasbourg. Things are more nuanced.”

Responding later, Barry Macdonald QC, for Mrs Hughes, said: “There was sufficient detail to allow the Minister of Justice to work up a paper put forward for consideration.

“The important point is that it wasn’t given any consideration at all, it was blocked. That’s incompatible with Convention rights.”

The case continues.