§ Lord Mayhew of Twysdenasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether without the protection of anonymity there will be a risk for military witnesses giving evidence in Londonderry to the "Bloody Sunday" Inquiry that they and their families will be attacked. [HL2751]
93WA
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Northern Ireland Office (Lord Dubs)The issue of anonymity is a matter for the tribunal and ultimately for the courts. The tribunal in its ruling of 5 May allows for military witnesses to apply for anonymity on the grounds that it is justified by their personal circumstances. This ruling was in certain respects quashed in the Divisional Court on 17 June; the tribunal has been granted leave to appeal. It would therefore not be appropriate to comment further.
§ Lord Mayhew of Twysdenasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether any further application for anonymity for military witnesses who served the Crown many years ago, which by order of the "Bloody Sunday" Inquiry must be made publicly, will have the consequence that the very matters which are said to justify the application in the interest of justice will be known to those by whom the witnesses believe themselves to be threatened. [HL2752]
§ Lord DubsIt is a matter for the inquiry how to conduct its proceedings, including the consideration of questions of anonymity. The inquiry has issued guidance for the submission of applications for anonymity on special reasons. This guidance is, among other things, designed to ensure that applicants for anonymity are not required to disclose publicly information that would be likely to defeat the purpose of the application.
§ Lord Mayhew of Twysdenasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether there is any, and if so what, restraint preventing them from securing a direction to the "Bloody Sunday" Inquiry that military witnesses shall be protected by anonymity, whether by means of amended resolutions by both Houses of Parliament or otherwise. [HL2753]
§ Lord DubsWhen the inquiry was established in January last year, the Prime Minister explained to the House of Commons that it was important to make absolutely clear not only that the inquiry was impartial but that it was seen to be impartial. That remains the case, and it is not for the Government to interfere with the way the inquiry chooses to conduct its business.
Even if the Government did want to instruct the inquiry how to operate, it would be inconsistent with the Tribunal of Inquiry (Evidence) Act 1921, under which the inquiry was established, to do so. The resolution of both Houses of Parliament described the issue into which the inquiry was to inquire. But its procedures, as an independent judicial inquiry, are a matter for it. Questions of anonymity are therefore a matter for the tribunal and ultimately for the courts.
§ Lord Mayhew of Twysdenasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they are content with the contrast between the anonymity for those giving evidence of the whereabouts of their murdered victims in Northern Ireland and the lack of anonymity for those who served the Crown in Northern 94WA Ireland and who will now be witnesses before the "Bloody Sunday" Inquiry. [HL2754]
§ Lord DubsThe issue of anonymity in respect of witnesses who may be called to give evidence to the tribunal of inquiry is a matter for the inquiry (subject to the courts in the event of judicial review). The Northern Ireland (Location of Victims Remains) Act 1999, which relates to an entirely different situation, does not confer anonymity on those giving information as to the whereabouts of their murdered victims. It imposes restrictions on the subsequent disclosure of information of this kind provided to the commission and provides that such information, and evidence obtained as a result, is not admissible in criminal proceedings on behalf of the prosecution.