Asymmetric Justice
During yesterday's Stormont Live Special, I discussed with Michael Mansfield (about 1 hour and 15 minutes in) the notion that the Saville inquiry had provided "asymmetric justice". I raised this particularly in relation to IRA victims and the unionist response to the tribunal. Mr Mansfield replied by making the distinction that the Bloody Sunday killings had been carried out by agents of the state.
That said, the morning after, the outcome also feels asymmetric in other ways - not just between state and paramilitary victims, but also between the Bloody Sunday families who finally won the right to a fresh inquiry, and those others who appear to have little hope of achieving a similar process. The families of those killed in Ballymurphy in 1971 will no doubt be pondering David Cameron's statement ruling out further costly and open ended inquiries. Moreover Pat Finucane's family remains locked in a lengthy stand off with the government, rejecting its offer of an investigation under the auspices of the Inquiries Act 2005, which they believe gives the state the powers to thwart any independent probe.
Which brings us to the whole notion of a truth or legacy commission, being highlighted now by the former Secretary of State Shaun Woodward. Although Robin Eames and Denis Bradley's suggestion that there should be across the board recognition payments was roundly rubbished, the other element in their report (that of a legacy commission) remains open for consideration. Indeed anyone who listened to Owen Paterson's interview on Inside Politics on Saturday will note that he wasn't talking about Eames Bradley in the past tense.
The Eames Bradley idea was rejected by Sinn Fein largely because it was part of a report commissioned by the British. Gerry Adams favours something like a UN led tribunal. However there isn't in practice a lot to distinguish the Eames Bradley legacy commission, which they wanted to be chaired by an international figure, from the Sinn Fein international truth recovery process. What's clear is there's little point embarking on any process unless there's a high likelihood that all the key players will actually, at long last, tell the truth.
But after employing talks facilitators, ceasefire monitors and decommissioning commissioners, are we really going to trawl the world for yet more elder statesmen prepared to take on the role of abitrating on the past? How long might such a commission last and crucially, given the economic times, how much could it cost? Eames Bradley put a £170 million price tag on their proposed five year commission, just £20 million less than the much criticised price tag for the Bloody Sunday tribunal. For comparitive purposes, the Regional Cancer Centre at Belfast's City Hospital cost £70 million - the planned satellite radiotherapy centre for the Altnagelvin hospital has a projected price of £60 million, So is there a model for dealing with the past which can provide truth and justice without enriching lawyers and draining the public coffers at a time when vital services will inevitably be under strain?
I'm 
Comments