Rights and wrongs: why are some citizens more equal than others?

Fergus Finlay

Why has this one citizen of Ireland no apparent rights at all not even the right for his family to know how and why he died? The report which would provide some degree of accountability is, it seems, in the process of being buried.

And that would be a denial in fact a gross betrayal of Peter McKenna's human rights. I have written about Peter before in these pages, and I'll remind you in a minute about why he matters so much.

But first I have to say that I've spent the past weekend, as you have, listening to, and reading about, the rights of the so-called Colombia Three. Three gentleman who entered a foreign country using false Irish passports for reasons that seem (to put it at its mildest) highly dubious, who did untold damage to the peace process by their shenanigans, and who surely didn't use their own identities to re-enter Ireland.

They have rights, no doubt. I wouldn't argue with that because I've always believed there are fundamental rights without which our democracy would simply cease to exist. Those rights must be extended even to those who, on the face of it, deserve them least.

But isn't it extraordinary that the debate about the rights of some Irish citizens should convulse the political system and the media, and the rights of others seem to merit hardly a mention.

Before I leave the subject of the Colombia Three, I heard the president of Sinn Féin, Gerry Adams, telling us all on the news on Sunday that they shouldn't be extradited. And he went on to tell us that we all, in politics and the media and in civil society, have an enormous responsibility to demonstrate that politics works, and to respond positively to the "historic" gesture by the IRA.

No, Gerry, we don't. Thousands of Irish people have spent the last 30 years trying to make politics work, while you actively defended a campaign of violence and terror aimed at undermining not just politics, but democracy. You have a responsibility now to make politics work and not just for you and your party. And you could start by deciding that you don't have the right to lecture other people about how to be democrats.

I want to ensure that politics works for Peter McKenna, an Irish citizen who died in circumstances that raised the most serious questions. As I said, I have written about Peter a couple of times here. Both Pat Rabbitte and Enda Kenny raised his death in the Dáil. In fact, when Enda Kenny raised the matter, he quoted from the last article I wrote in the Irish Examiner last June.

This is what he put on the record of the Dáil, in seeking to establish from the Taoiseach why the report into Peter's death had not been published: "At Leaders' Questions on 1 June, Deputy Rabbitte suggested to the Taoiseach that he should make himself aware of the McKenna case. In a newspaper article on 7 June this year, the following was said about the late Peter McKenna. He'd had a recent stroke. He was blind. And he couldn't communicate. The bottom half of his body was blackened as a result of blood poisoning.

"When he had arrived in Beaumont hospital earlier that evening they discovered that he was completely dehydrated. Those supposed to be caring for him hadn't even had the wit to see that he was in terrible thirst when he died, a fortnight later, the catheter was still there, untended, untreated, uncleaned. Almost certainly, it was the failure to deal properly with the catheter that caused the blood poisoning that brought him to die in pain."

He went on to ask why the report still hadn't been published, even though it had apparently been in the hands of the authorities for months.

This is what the Taoiseach said in reply: "I understand that the report was received by the health authorities last autumn and that it was very critical and raised serious issues. All those points that the deputy has raised are correct "While I understand the points made by the deputy are correct, I cannot answer his question about the publication of the report. We must take legal advice in this regard."

THAT exchange took place on June 21 last, six weeks ago. The following day the Taoiseach returned to the subject, only this time with a bit more detail.

"First, I wish to acknowledge the upset of the family of the late Peter McKenna, whose death prompted the issues we discussed here yesterday. His brother and sister have spoken movingly about his final days. Any family would rightly be upset, as would I and any member of the House clearly, the delay in finalising the report about his death, and the delay in acting on it, is not satisfactory for me or the Tánaiste

"As the Tánaiste said yesterday, we will publish this report after it has gone through the necessary due process. It must go through this process to take account of the legal consideration that people mentioned in the report have a right to see the report The parties to the report have until 6 July to give their views. They include the family, the doctors and the members of the board in this case."

As you can see from this, the Taoiseach (and earlier the Tánaiste) have both acknowledged the serious questions there are to be answered about the tragic death of an Irish citizen. Both have acknowledged the existence of a detailed report into Peter's death, and both have committed themselves to its publication.

But nothing has happened. I believe we are entitled to know why. Why does Peter's death not seem to matter enough to raise the questions in public that must be raised? As it happens, since I wrote about this in June, I have seen the report.

I was shown it with members of Peter's family, but in conditions of confidentiality, and we all gave an undertaking that we would not break that confidentiality until the report was made properly available.

But that was weeks ago, and since then Peter's family have endured endless frustration in seeking to have the report published. I can say that the report I saw was hard-hitting, and that it made it clear that serious explanations were owed by individuals and agencies about the circumstances leading to Peter's death.

Threats have been issued to try to prevent the Health Service Executive (who now have the report) from publishing it or even giving it to Peter's family. I believe that serious efforts have been made (not by the HSE) to try to get the author of the report, Martin Hynes, to change it.

I believe the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste both have it in their power to ensure that the report into Peter's death is published without further delay. Peter was never charged with any crime. He never falsified a document in his life. His rights matter. There must be no more betrayal of them.