Judge scathing over Loughinisland report

Judge scathing over Loughinisland report

By Joanne Fleming

THE Police Ombudsman's report into the Loughinisland murders was "unlawful" and unfair, a High Court judge has ruled.

At a judicial review judgement at Belfast's High Court today, Mr Justice McCloskey upheld a challenge brought by two retired policemen - Raymond White and Ronnie Hawthorne, a former police chief in the Downpatrick area.

Their lawyer, David McMillen QC, argued the Ombudsman had created an ac hoc investigative system, had failed to properly consult and protect officers it accused of criminality and collusion and had exceeded his statutory powers.

Dr Michael Maguire’s report into the UVF murder of Adrian Rogan (34), Malcolm Jenkinson (53), Barney Green (87), Daniel McCreanor (59), Patrick O’Hare (35) and Eamon Byrne (39) was published in June last year and found “collusion was a significant feature” of the 1994 attack. While he found no evidence the police knew in advance about the Heights Bar murder plot, Dr Maguire was heavily critical of how the RUC Special Branch handled informers and failed to robustly disrupt the activities of a UVF gang operating in south Down.

In his findings today, Mr Justice McCloskey found that Mr Hawthorne, who was the Downpatrick sub-divisional commander at the time of the murders, had been vindicated "unreservedly".

"However, it should not have been necessary for Mr Hawthorne to initiate legal proceedings of this kind in order to secure the judicial analysis, conclusions and vindication of which he is now the beneficiary," the judge said. 

He also found that none of the police officers subjected to "destructive and withering condemnations" of colluding with UVF terrorists in the Heights Bar attack had the protection of due process.

"They were, in effect, accused, tried and convicted without notice and in their absence," he said.

On collusion, the Judge said it is difficult to conceive of a more withering and damning condemnation of professional police officers.

The Ombudsman, he found, did not use the language of accusation, or opt for restrained vocabulary of opinion, belief or suspicion.

"Rather, he determined, unambiguously, that collusion had occurred," the judge said.

"This was an outright and unqualified condemnation. It is properly described as a verdict."

The determination that RUC officers colluded with UVF terrorists in carrying out the Heights Bar attack was little different from a verdict of guilty beyond reasonable doubt, the judge said.

He pointed out that no police officer was prosecuted for such actions or accused of disciplinary offences.

"The Police Ombudsman's 'unambiguous determination' that police officers were guilty of collusion is a determination that such officers participated in the murder of six innocent civilians and the injuries suffered by five innocent civilians on 18 June, 1994 at the Heights Bar, Loughinisland. 

“The determination is expressed in unqualified terms. It is a statement of the most damning kind,” he said.

Judge McCloskey said the Ombudsman's report should have made abundantly clear to the reader that the unequivocal determination of police collusion with the UVF terrorists in the murders did not apply to Mr Hawthorne. 

“However, it signally failed to do so. The authors of this report were careless, thoughtless and inattentive in the language and structuring of the document in this respect."

Summing up, Mr Justice McCloskey had words of praise for the families of the Loughinisland victims.

"The balanced and dignified conduct of the families in these proceedings must be unreservedly acknowledged," he said.

He added: "It is a matter of regret that as a result of this decision finality and closure for the affected families will be postponed once again. 

“However, the task of the court is to conduct an independent and impartial adjudication and to dispassionately apply the relevant legal rules and principles to the material facts."

The judge noted that the primary remedy sought by the applicants is an order quashing the report. This will be considered at a further hearing next month.

The Police Ombudsman's Office expressed disappointment at the judgment but said it will need time over the coming weeks to consider it carefully.

“As we look at the judgment in more detail we will examine all the options open to us including an appeal,” said a statement. “Clearly, however, we have to wait until the final outcome of the challenge.

“This judgment may have implications for how Northern Ireland deals with historical matters, affecting not only this Office, but also proposed solutions such as the Historical Inquiries Unit.”

South Down MP, Chris Hazzard, said there was "bitter disappointment" at the ruling.

However, the Sinn Fein politician said whatever criticisms have been made regarding the Ombudsman's handling of the report does not mean that collusion was not involved in the case.

"There is a wealth of evidence already established regarding the scale of the collusion with the loyalist paramilitaries who carried out the Loughinisland massacre,” he said. 

“And it's important to note that the judge didn't controvert any of the facts that were in the original Police Ombudsman's report. The car used in the attack was still destroyed, interview notes were still destroyed, suspects were still protected.

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 18.0px Helvetica} p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 18.0px 0.0px; font: 18.0px Helvetica; color: #323333} span.s1 {letter-spacing: 0.0px}

"Today's ruling does not change any of that and Sinn Fein will continue to support the Loughinisland families in their campaign for truth and justice.”