Speeches by Robinson.

“If you are compiling more evidence—I think you said that you want to do something more detailed in the coming weeks, and that you are going to focus on it again—do you have suggestions for amendments to the Bill, or are you just making your concern known?”

“Okay. Thank you.”

“Good morning, everyone. Mr McVey, I think the Committee is pleased that you are in post, and that there is a victims commissioner, because on the occasions that we have met the victims commission, there was a vacancy. It is important at this time that victims have a voice and that you can give voice to their concerns. …”

“Mr Johnstone or Ms Kilpatrick, are you aware of this process? Did you notice a distinction in the joint framework that this is outside of the Legacy Commission, but a family report from the guards is a mechanism that is available? Have any of your members accessed that provision of information?”

“You have helpfully mentioned the failings of the Irish Government in terms of article 2 of ECHR. You know that they took an interstate case against the United Kingdom Government. Do you feel it would be appropriate for the UK to consider taking action against the Irish Government if they were to fail in their obligatio…”

“Your primary function is to advise Government on human rights obligations in Northern Ireland. You will be well aware that there are citizens of Northern Ireland who are being failed in the human rights obligations of a neighbouring jurisdiction. Do you give advice? Do you comment? Would you be prepared to suggest that…”

“And you have a power to take proceedings.”

“None at all? You just support people that do?”

“Sorry, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission does not take cases?”

“But the Human Rights Commission takes cases.”

“Would you support a family from Northern Ireland who wished to raise these issues outside of the jurisdiction?”

“But you would consider it.”

“That is not the point that Mr Johnstone was making. He was making the point that if someone is giving information for information retrieval purposes, those are protected disclosures and therefore cannot be used against you. If that information is gleaned through separate channels in a criminal investigation, of course …”

“That is the issue then. If information is subsequently given, having decided that no information is there for prosecution, but that subsequent information could provide information that would make prosecution possible, that stage has already been concluded.”

“That is the issue with that information.”

“I think that is very interesting. For example, terrorist A has evaded justice—probably hidden in the Irish Republic for a while and came back again—and there are no lines of inquiry. The criminal part—the stage 1 process for criminal prosecution—has passed. Then terrorist A comes in and starts giving information that c…”

“Are you unclear as to how that will happen?”

“I know. We are asking these questions, because for us taking evidence, this is crucial.”

“You accept the concerns that have been raised, but you are not clear as to what the actual position is.”

“Your position is that there is no firewall—you do not move from one stage to the next, and that information can never go back to the first stage again.”