Government moves to secure Supreme Court appeal option in Sean Brown case
Judges in Belfast have ruled that NI Secretary Hilary Benn is acting unlawfully in failing to hold a public inquiry into Mr Brown’s murder.
The Government has moved to secure the option of challenging a court ruling that found it was acting unlawfully in failing to order a public inquiry into the murder of a Gaelic Games official in Northern Ireland.
Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn has sought leave for a Supreme Court appeal over the Sean Brown case.
Mr Benn has not confirmed he ultimately intends to take the case to the Supreme Court, but has applied for “protective leave” to appeal to the UK’s highest court if he believes that course of action to be “necessary”.
The deadline for making such an application is later this week.
Northern Ireland’s First Minister Michelle O’Neill has branded the Government’s move “cruel and inhumane”.
Mr Benn has also applied to the Court of Appeal in Belfast for further time to consider its judgment in the Brown case.
He has indicated the outcome of that application, and what transpires during any subsequent extension, if one is granted, will determine his decision making in respect of a Supreme Court challenge.
Mr Brown, 61, the chairman of Bellaghy Wolfe Tones GAA club in Co Londonderry, was ambushed, kidnapped and murdered by loyalist paramilitaries as he locked the gates of the club in May 1997.
No-one has ever been convicted of his killing.
At the start of April, three judges at the Court of Appeal in Belfast said the Government’s failure to order a public inquiry into the murder “cannot stand” and gave Mr Benn four weeks to “reflect upon the judgment”.
Mr Benn has now asked the judges for more time to consider their ruling.
He had brought the case to the Court of Appeal to challenge an earlier ruling by a High Court judge that he must set up a public inquiry into the killing.
The Northern Ireland Secretary contends the case involves a key constitutional principle of who should order public inquiries, the Government or the judiciary.
In regard to Mr Brown’s murder, Mr Benn argues the case could instead be dealt with by a new Troubles investigatory body, the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR).
Last year, a coroner halted an inquest into the killing, expressing concern that his ability to examine the case had been “compromised” by the extent of confidential state material being excluded from the proceedings on national security grounds.
Preliminary inquest proceedings had already heard that in excess of 25 people had been linked by intelligence to the murder, including several state agents.
It had also been alleged in court that surveillance of a suspect in the murder was temporarily stopped on the evening of the killing, only to resume again the following morning.
The Court of Appeal judges said the limitations of the ICRIR to deal with cases such as Mr Brown’s killing are “apparent”.
The panel of judges said the commission, as it is currently established, is not equipped to deal with cases which involve sensitive material.
Mr Benn has vowed to implement reforms to ensure the new truth recovery body is capable of carrying out an independent and rigorous investigation into the murder of Mr Brown.
The ICRIR was established as part of the previous government’s contentious Legacy Act.
Mr Benn is repealing the Act but is retaining the ICRIR, stating that he wants to improve its disclosure regime and, in specific circumstances, enable the commission to hold public hearings.
The Labour MP had faced vocal calls, including from Mr Brown’s widow Bridie, not to challenge the Court of Appeal ruling and move to set up an inquiry.
However, on Wednesday Mr Benn filed applications with the Court of Appeal seeking an extension of time for decision making and seeking protective leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
“The murder of Sean Brown nearly 28 years ago was brutal and despicable and it has caused deep pain and anguish to Mrs Brown, her family, and many in the wider community,” he said.
“I know that this has been exacerbated by the time it has taken to find answers.
“As I have said many times, I am committed to ensuring that there is a full, thorough and independent Article 2-compliant investigation into the murder of Sean Brown.
“I am taking steps to repeal and replace the previous government’s Legacy Act to ensure that we have a legacy system that is capable of delivering for all families who lost loved ones during the Troubles, and who are seeking answers.
“It is clear that the detailed judgment requires a full and considered response.
“I have therefore today asked the Court of Appeal for more time to consider it and the terms of the declaration. This will allow me to receive comprehensive advice that responds in full to the issues the court has identified.
“Also, given the approaching deadline from the court for requesting leave to appeal, I have today asked the court for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, in case that should ultimately be necessary.
“These steps will not delay the Government’s determination to take the necessary steps to ensure that the system for dealing with legacy is human rights-compliant and can command the confidence of victims and families.”
Ms O’Neill responded: “At the Court of Appeal, Lady Chief Justice Keegan was unequivocal in her remarks, saying that ‘the decision to refuse a public inquiry cannot stand and is unlawful and in breach of Article 2 obligations’.
“It is an affront to the basic principles of truth and justice that Keir Starmer’s government is threatening to once again drag Bridie Brown and her family back to court.
“As Bridie Brown previously said, five High Court judges have instructed the British government to do the right thing, yet it seems hellbent on denying her family a public inquiry.
“This cruel and inhumane act is just the latest example of British government political cynicism — blocking the right of families to access truth and justice.”
She added: “This will only add further insult to the Brown family who, unlike the British government, have led with courage and dignity in their fight for answers into Sean Brown’s murder.
“These cruel actions undermine public confidence in the administration of justice.”
SDLP leader Claire Hanna said: “Sean’s widow Bridie is 87 years of age and it is heartbreaking what she and the whole Brown family have been through to get answers around their beloved husband and father’s death.
“To continue to deny that to them is simply wrong and it’s disgraceful that the UK government continues to prioritise keeping secrets for those responsible for murder over the rights of victims and their families.”
A spokesperson for Ireland’s deputy premier Simon Harris said he would continue to raise the Brown case in engagements with the UK government.
The spokesperson said: “As the Tanaiste said to the Secretary of State in private last week and again in their joint press conference, the Brown family have waited too long to find out the truth of what happened to Sean Brown.
“We are approaching the 28th anniversary of his murder. In the absence of an effective investigation into his death – which the UK government agrees has not yet taken place – the passage of time makes this increasingly pressing.
“Bridie Brown has shown enormous strength in pursuing this case through every available channel.”
