Following
the British announcement of a high profile inquiry
into a Royal Ulster Constabulary shoot-to-kill
policy, some years back, this writer issued a
press statement predicting a "Widgery type
whitewash". Almost immediately I was called
by a BBC reporter, who coincidentally was an old
friend of the English constable selected to head
the inquiry. The reporter insisted that I had
misjudged his friend, who would not be party to
a whitewash. The BBC reporter would be proven
right. His friend, John Stalker, did indeed attempt
to conduct a fact-finding rather than fact-hiding
mission, and for failing to fulfill his real mission,
was removed on a pretext with his career in tatters.
As documented in an ongoing series of revelations
by the dedicated human rights group Relatives
for Justice, (RFJ) there is little risk that the
Historical Enquiries Team, set-up by the British
to investigate thousands of killings, including
many committed with British complicity, will repeat
Stalker's mistake. However Britain's new version
of the old strategy of whitewash by inquiry, alongside
British and DUP maneuvering for Sinn Fein cover
for the re-named RUC, raises important political
questions about the crown's true motives under
the Stormont Deal.
PATTERN
The
British have a long history of setting-up what
are variously named inquiries, commissions or
tribunals as part of a blatant strategy of whitewash
or cover-up. A few examples will suffice to put
the HET in context. When word began to leak from
the internment camps that suspects rounded- up
without charge had been brutally subjected to
what was euphemistically called interrogation-in-depth,
a crescendo of protest arose. Stiff-lipped denials
or claims of isolated errors by lower ranked troops,
could not explain away hooding suspects, forcing
them to stand for hours in search positions, blaring
disorienting white noise, beatings, abuse and
other refinements now known as experiments in
sensory deprivation torture. A strategy had to
be devised to blunt Irish outrage.
A
British enquiry headed by Edmund Compton was contrived.
Compton and the crown solemnly exonerated crown
forces on the obscure and nonsensical grounds
that these British forces had not "enjoyed"
brutalizing their Irish captives. This distinction
would make small difference to the" hooded
men, " torture victims, who had little opportunity
between the hoods and white noise to discern the
emotions of their torturers.
Britain
not guilty was the verdict solemnly proclaimed
with British impartiality by a British commission
vindicating the British. So satisfactory was the
result that a European Court finding years later
that Britain was guilty of inhuman treatment,
which is outlawed under the European Convention
was reported by British headlines, saying "Britain
not guilty of torture" outlawed under a different
provision.
The
word Compton entered the vernacular of the north
denoting a ridiculous lie or blatant whitewash.
For a time, one caught in an implausible tale
might be told "who gave you that excuse Edmund
Compton?" or "even Compton would not
whitewash that".
WIDGERY
Compton
however would be soon outdone by Widgery's inquiry
on Bloody Sunday. Widgery was faced with the monumental
difficulty that tens of thousands of people had
witnessed innocent civil rights marchers shot
down by the British Paratroopers who were likely
deployed with premeditation to teach the Irish
a lesson or draw the IRA into an ambush. Undeterred,
Widgery courted nonsense about nail bombers, assistant
nail bombers, crossfire, innocent mistakes, paraffin
tests for gunshot residue, etc that all but blamed
the Irish for forcing the reluctant British to
shoot them.
DIPLOCK
Still
other commissions operated with sleight of hand
to announce the removal of some wrong by substituting
something worse. The Hunt report trumpeted the
abolition of the B- Specials and gave us the Ulster
Defense Regiment so that loyalist paramilitaries
might enjoy British Army arms and training. Diplock
provided the infamous non-jury courts which bear
his name in dubious honor, as well as set in motion
the legal constructs which would lead irrevocably
to criminalization, the H-blocks and ten hunger
strike deaths.
PAT
FINUCANE
Moving
to contemporary permutations of this strategy,
Blair last year railroaded the Inquiries Act 2005
through Westminster, under which the British could
omit any negative evidence, facts or findings
from any Inquiry report at its sole discretion.
The British also gave themselves final say over
what information could be made public and what
facts would be censored. Amnesty International
called upon judges not to preside over any inquiry
set-up under these constraints, condemning such
an inquiry as a sham, which the crown could muzzle
, censor and control. The family of murdered civil
right lawyer Pat Finucane has refused to participate
in any British inquiry into his murder restricted
by such terms.
The
Saville Tribunal was proposed by Tony Blair as
a confidence building measure in advance of the
Stormont Deal. It was to signal a willingness
to give the consolation of truth to the families
of the Bloody Sunday victims murdered, and then
defamed by the crown. It was welcomed by those
courageous families and the people of Derry.
Now
so many years, so many delays and so many British
obstructions later, there is growing fear that
the families have endured all this only to be
given a watered- down Widgery, absolving crown
officials and Stormont and assigning any blame
to a combination of tragic circumstances, and
understandable errors in judgment or mistakes
by individual troopers. Britain's attitude is
perhaps best illustrated by it's refusal to cooperate
with the Barron Tribunal's inquiry into bombings
and murders carried out in the south with crown
force collusion. If the crown cannot predetermine
the outcome by rigging the judge or terms of reference
it will stonewall, obstruct and boycott. Members
of the crown forces will not testify or attend.
SQUARELY
The
HET fits squarely within this British strategy
of cover-up. Thousands of killings between 1969
and 1998, include many committed by British forces
directly or in collusion with pro-British loyalists
,or British agents like Denis Donaldson and Freddie
Scapatticci. Nationalist and republican families
suffered not only the murders, but the dismissive
and callous treatment by the British crown forces
who sanctioned these murders and ignored demands
for justice. It was these murders that received
perfunctory investigation because those tasked
with investigating had blood on their hands.
A
review was finally established. With British impartiality,
the British placed the enquiry under the control
of the PSNI Chief Constable. The team will serve
as a unit of the re-named RUC, whose members would
have most to gain by insuring that a fact-hiding
rather than a fact-finding ,mission is carried
out.
It
has now already been revealed that RUC members
were allowed to take home files. Perhaps some
of these homes had shredders. Most had fireplaces.
Over
half of the files for these murders cannot be
located .How many RUC who engaged in shoot-to-kill
or colluded with loyalists death squads, or worked
through British agents would be unduly troubled
by decommissioning any files possessing evidence
which incriminates them?
A
few egregious items have already been revealed,
for example evidence from the Loughinisland sectarian
attack in which innocents were murdered at a time
when loyalists death squads were virtually run
through the crown, has been destroyed. No fear
of DNA evidence.
The
amount of destroyed or missing files has proven
one thing. This cannot be explained away as a
few bad apples or rogue agents. The scope shows
an unmistakable pattern of whitewash and cover-up.
Many of those who carried out shoot-to-kill or
collusion murders will have risen through the
ranks of the RUC to the upper levels of PSNI command
structure. The British cannot pretend that the
PSNI is not the re-named RUC then reveal how many
members in the command structure and the force
were complicit in these murders.Can Republicans
truly believe that HET will be anything other
than another chapter in this strategy of concealment?
POLITICAL
IMPLICATIONS
Why
do the British need to continue a strategy of
whitewash by inquiry? Surely, if British rule
has changed with the Stormont Deal, such tactics
would be obsolete. Families could at long last
be given the consolation of truth, and the British
could acknowledge blame in murders such as Bloody
Sunday or that of Pat Finucane.Instead the strategy
of cover-up and whitewash continues. Indeed, the
HET unit will be speaking to the victims of crown
collusion asserting that their PSNI, is different
from the bad old days of the RUC in a public relations
exercise even while it continues the cover-up.
The whitewash will unfold alongside British and
DUP maneuvers to compel Sinn Fein backing and
political cover for the re-named British crown
constabulary. The British are seeking Sinn Fein
representatives who will be touted as visible
tokens of support for British forces enforcing
British rule and British laws. Such ministers
will no doubt be touted as a British answer to
any charges of whitewash or cover-up. Widgery
or Compton would not whitewash that.
