McBride Judicial review - update day one

Yesterday, for 6 hours, Seamus Tracey, legal counsel for the McBride family argued a forceful case against the Army Board decision:

• He argued the decision was outrageous, discriminatory and racist;
• The army had shown politically motivated contempt for the court's original decision;
• The guardsmen in their own submissions had never argued for any exceptional circumstances;
• The decision is in violation of Articles 2, 13 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights;
• The army authorities had refused to furnish the army board with certain documents submitted on behalf of Jean McBride;
• They had also refused to allow Jean to participate in army board hearings or give adequate reasons for that;
• In addition they had allowed the representatives of the Guardsmen full access to documents that were submitted on behalf of Jean but had not allowed Jean or those acting on her behalf full access to all documents furnished to the Board on behalf of the Guardsmen, i.e. documents were withheld from the family.

As a result of the murder conviction the Guardsmen would not be allowed a taxi licence never mind a licence to own a firearm yet the MoD retain them in the British army and issue them with asault rifles.

Basically, the entire Army Board decision is in clear violation in substance and in procedure of domestic, European and international human rights safeguards.

The hearing was attended by representatives of the Department of Foreign Affairs in Dublin, British Irish Rights Watch and the Committee on the Administration of Justice. Today (30/04/2001), counsel for the MoD, Ian Burnett QC (who is also counsel at the Bloody Sunday Tribunal) will be putting forward the case for the British army, then there will be a response from counsel for Jean, followed by a summing up.

Peter McBride