Finucane: Minister accused of misleading parliament

Northern Ireland Secretary Paul Murphy deliberately misled the British parliament when delaying a public inquiry into the murder of Belfast solicitor Pat Finucane, Belfast High Court heard today.

The accusation was made by Seamus Treacy QC representing the Finucane family during a judicial review aimed at forcing the Government to proceed with an independent probe.

The British government has given the go-ahead for three public inquiries into the murders of Lurgan solicitor Rosemary Nelson, LVF leader Billy Wright and Portadown Catholic Robert Hamill following the publication of reports by retired Canadian Judge Peter Cory into alleged security force collusion.

Mr Murphy told parliament on the day the reports were published that he was delaying the inquiry into the Finucane case because of the impending trial of a man charged with his murder.

He also told the Commons that as a result of the ongoing investigation into the murder, there was a possibility that further prosecutions could follow and the inquiry could not go ahead until criminal proceedings were completed.

Ken Barrett is to be tried in September with the murder of the solicitor in February 1989 and other charges including membership of the Ulster Defence Association.

Mr Treacy told the court that in a letter to Mr Finucane’s widow Geraldine on April 1, Mr Murphy said he was acting on the advice of the Attorney General.

But the lawyer said this conflicted with information given to the Finucane family by Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens and his team who are investigating the circumstances of Mr Finucane’s death.

According to Mr Treacy, Mr Stevens had told Mrs Finucane that the advice they had received from the Attorney General was that Barrett’s trial was the only obstacle to a public inquiry.

“As far as the Stevens team were concerned they were quite confident that as far as there was any impediment it was only the Barrett case.”

Mr Treacy added that a detective belonging to the Stevens team told the Finucane family they were being encouraged to say there was a string of prosecutions in the pipeline and this was being used to block a public inquiry.

He told the judge, Mr Justice Gillen: “Nowhere in the statement to the House of Commons did the Secretary of State refer at all to the advice he had received from the Attorney General.

“The Secretary of State in this case has misled the House of Commons, he misled Mrs Finucane and was prepared to allow your lordship to be misled as well.”

He added: “This is a very grave state of affairs. If your lordship did not have a note of this meeting with Sir John Stevens what you would have was the statement of the Secretary of State and also the letter of Mrs Finucane.

“I submit that what it suggested was that the advice they received from the Attorney General was they could not have a public inquiry until the conclusions of prosecutions, plural.

The lawyer argued that Mr Murphy did not mention the Attorney General in his Commons statement because: “He did not want to expose himself to the accusation that he had misrepresented the situation to the House of Commons.”

He claimed that there were “very powerful interests at play who did not want this inquiry to go ahead”.

He added that they were prepared to go to any lengths including the burning down of offices belonging to the Stevens Inquiry.

The judicial review was adjourned until April 28.