[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 3]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 4505]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




     NORTHERN IRELAND: INSUFFICIENT ATTEMPTS TO DEAL WITH THE PAST

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 13, 2014

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, I convened a 
hearing that inquired into the Northern Ireland peace process, 
particularly that aspect of it which is called ``dealing with the 
past.''
  Sadly, much of what we heard about amounts to failures to deal with 
the past, as in the rejection of the recent proposal made by Dr. 
Richard Haass. Dr. Haass served as Chair of the Panel of Parties in the 
Northern Ireland Executive--that is, he was asked to assist in 
brokering an agreement to move the peace process forward. In that 
capacity Dr. Haass spent months consulting and formulating a proposal. 
In the end, the proposal was not accepted by all of the parties, though 
it clarified where progress can be made and where sticking points 
remain.
  One of the most important questions that Dr. Haass and the parties 
dealt with is what will be done with the Historical Enquiries Team 
(HET) and the Police Ombudsman of Northern Ireland (PONI)--two key 
bodies established by the Good Friday agreement to investigate unsolved 
murders.
  We discussed Dr. Haass' proposal to replace the HET and PONI with a 
Historical Investigations Unit and Baroness O'Loan's suggestion to 
replace them with a rather different Investigative Commission during 
the hearing. For now I want to underline this: both agree that the 
status quo way of dealing with Troubles crimes should be replaced. 
Likewise the parties in the Northern Ireland executive reportedly 
agreed with this aspect of Dr. Haass' proposal. So the agreement is 
broad on this point. It's time to move to a better system.
  As Dr. Haass' proposal stated: ``The multiplicity of institutions and 
vehicles for justice in respect of conflict-related incidents, however, 
creates confusion and places enormous burdens on the police. The HET, 
PONI, and inquests also suffer from the perception that they have 
proceeded too slowly.''
  The facts alone tell this story: of the more than 3,000 Troubles-
related deaths that occurred between 1968 and 1998, the HET has yet to 
review some 600 cases, involving 800 deaths.
  Dr. Haass' proposed Historical Investigations Unit has much to say 
for it--by establishing a single unit with full investigative power it 
would eliminate the overlaps, contradictions, and waste of resources in 
the mandates of the HET and PONI.
  Likewise the suggestion of Baroness O'Loan--who served very 
successfully as Police Ombudsman from 2000 to 2007--for an 
Investigative Commission that would be a ``totally independent 
investigative fully empowered and fully resourced body with a remit to 
examine any Troubles related cases involving death up to 2006 . . .'' 
Lady O'Loan's proposal emphasizes the need for an unimpeachably 
independent agency in order to win the trust of both communities.
  In any case Dr. Haass' proposal remains extremely important on all 
points--those involved most closely in the peace process have expressed 
their confidence that it accurately reflects the current divisions and 
positions of the parties, and will likely serve as an important basis 
for future discussions.
  We also heard about the Finucane case and the British Military 
Reaction Force. These aspects of `dealing with the past' were not 
covered by Dr Haass' proposal to the Northern Ireland political 
parties--because they deal with matters that are the responsibility of 
the British Government.
  First, the British Government's failure to conduct the promised 
inquiry into collusion in the 1989 murder of Patrick Finucane. The 
British Government has a solemn obligation to initiate the full, 
independent, public, judicial inquiry that was agreed as part of the 
overall peace settlement in Northern Ireland during the Weston Park 
negotiations in 2001. This obligation, which was undertaken by both 
governments as part of the Belfast Agreement--one of the outstanding 
diplomatic achievements of recent decades--was an extremely serious 
undertaking. In order for the peace process to move forward, the 
British Government must honor it.
  While Prime Minister Cameron admitted to ``shocking'' levels of 
collusion between the state and loyalist paramilitaries in the murder 
of Patrick Finucane, and apologized to the Finucane family for it, this 
does not substitute for a full exposition of the facts behind the 
British State's involvement in the murder. Rather the steady increase 
in the amount of evidence being revealed publicly that the British 
State colluded with the killers has made honoring that commitment more 
important than ever.
  The British Government committed to implement the recommendation of a 
judge of international standing on six inquiry cases; in 2004, Judge 
Peter Cory recommended a public inquiry in the case of Patrick 
Finucane. To date, it remains the only case investigated where the 
recommendation has not been honored, a situation that is deeply 
unsatisfactory for many reasons but not least because it is evidently 
the one where the British Government is most culpable. Conversely, it 
is also the case in which--until the Prime Minister's announcement in 
December 2012--there has been the greatest level of sustained official 
denial by various state agencies.
  The many previous denials and time that has passed have drained 
public confidence in the peace process and diminished respect for the 
rule of law in Northern Ireland. It must be said that there are those 
who oppose the peace process and their opposition is dangerous. The 
failure to address the case of Patrick Finucane in the manner promised 
by the British Government provides a readily available propaganda tool 
for those who would abuse it to further their own ends. In our view, 
this represents yet another reason why the Finucane case is one of the 
most important unresolved issues in the peace process.
  Second, there is the matter of killings committed by the British 
Army's Military Reaction Force. From approximately 1971-1973 the 
British Army ran an undercover unit of approximately 40 soldiers, who 
operated out-of-uniform and in unmarked cars, mostly around Belfast.
  On November 21, 2013, the BBC program Panorama aired a documentary in 
which former members of MRF broke silence on aspects of the unit's 
operations, confirming what many had suspected for a long time. The BBC 
reported that, ``we've investigated the unit and discovered evidence 
that this branch of the British states sometimes . . . shot unarmed 
civilians.''
  The BBC spoke to seven former members of the MRF, and though the men 
were careful not to incriminate themselves or each other in specific 
killings, they made plain that, as The Independent fairly characterized 
the report, ``The unit . . . would carry out drive-by shootings against 
unarmed people on the street without any independent evidence they were 
part of the IRA.''
  As one of the former members admitted to the BBC, ``We were not there 
to act like an army unit--we were there to act like a terror group.''
  Now the onus is on the British Government to investigate and punish 
these crimes. The British Ministry of Defense has said that it has 
referred the matter to the police for investigation. Unfortunately, the 
BBC reported that ``these soldiers were undercover, and what they did 
has been airbrushed from the official record.''

                          ____________________