The British Northern Ireland Secretary, Hilary Benn, has instigated a compulsory public investigation into the assassination of Belfast lawyer Pat Finucane. This move follows a mandate from Belfast’s appeal court, requiring the UK government to clarify how it planned to conduct an investigation into the murder that respects human rights.
It appears that a public investigation was the only satisfactory approach. Despite the option for delay, it’s commendable that the Labour government acted promptly and decisively. This follows a 35-year pursuit by Geraldine Finucane, Pat’s widow, for an explanation on UK state’s involvement in her husband’s execution in their family home by a UDA armed attacker.
The Finucane family and their advocates have consistently contended that only a full public investigation could uncover the truth. The UK government conformed to this idea in 2001 as an element of a broader agreement concerning Northern Ireland, reached through the Weston Park talks. A reiteration of this commitment was made in 2004 when a UDA participant was found guilty for involvement in the murder. However, the UK capital reneged on both these promises.
Benn’s latest decision is seen by Geraldine Finucane as a potential turning point for handling past cases in Northern Ireland. Whether this is accurate hinges largely on how the proposed investigation is carried out and how the UK government, particularly its covert agencies, engage.
The reluctance shown by the UK government, marked by 35 years of delay in providing the Finucane family with answers, displays its intent to cover itself and its security services from undesirable investigation into potential illicit activities. This protectionist attitude also sits behind the now disregarded Legacy Act brought forth by the prior Conservative administration. This Act aimed at discontinuing future probes, investigations, and inquests while offering protection for those who collaborated with an Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery.
Every party in Northern Ireland resisted the Act, which has been essentially crippled due to a human rights-centered lawsuit. Although Labour asserts its aim to discontinue the Act, ambiguity surrounds its substitute, except that it must align with the European Charter of Human Rights.
Benn has granted himself a moment’s respite with his courageous choice in handling the Finucane matter, striving to reconcile this tangled situation. Indeed, it was the correct approach.
The proceedings from here on will significantly influence whether Labour can achieve, as many have strived but failed to do so before, the much-required closure on the Troubles. Nevertheless, it is an encouraging commencement.