Debate contribution: Legacy Cases: Irish Government

Debate contribution by Mrs Linda Dillon on 19 May 2026.

MLA

Mrs Linda Dillon

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

19 May 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Legacy Cases: Irish Government

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5550267

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Neither the motion nor the amendment is about victims. They are not about truth, and they are certainly not about reconciliation. They are yet another attempt to shield the British state from accountability for its actions during the conflict. The DUP and the UUP have spoken today about cooperation, but they ignore the fundamental reality that the ICRIR was rejected because families and victims felt that it was not compliant with articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, let us be honest: we know the DUP's view on the European Convention on Human Rights. That is not simply a Republican argument; that position has been advanced by victims' groups, human rights organisations, international legal experts and the Irish Government. There is absolutely no confidence in the process among the overwhelming majority of victims and survivors. You talked about the majority of victims and survivors: is that only those whom you want to listen to, or is it them all? The Irish Government backs them.

No, I will not. Not one credible victims' organisation asked for the legislation; not one family that has spent decades searching for the truth demanded immunity provisions.

Absolutely.

Absolutely.

Not one campaigner has said that the legislation represents justice. The British Government imposed the legislation over the heads of victims and survivors, because the primary objective was never reconciliation, truth or justice; it was protection. When the Members opposite talk about protections for former soldiers and an end to vexatious investigations, people know exactly what they mean: protection. Why do they need protection? They need to be protected from the law and the courts. You are the people who wax lyrical about abiding by the law; well, the law is there for everybody, and I do not see why you do not think that you, too, are answerable to it. They mean shutting down avenues to the truth, preventing accountability and drawing a line under state wrongdoing. We know that many investigations into actions — not mistakes — involving the military and state agencies during the conflict were deeply flawed at best and corrupt cover-ups at worst. Families have spent decades exposing collusion, destroyed evidence, withheld intelligence, corruption and systemic obstruction. Just look at the experiences of Sean Brown's family and other families. Again and again, it was not the state that delivered the truth willingly; it was families having to fight for decades against obstruction and denial to uncover the truth, and many continue to do so. There already was an agreed mechanism to deal with legacy: it was called the Stormont House Agreement, and the Irish Government were part of it. That was an agreement negotiated between parties and Governments and supported by the vast majority of victims and their spokespersons. However, once again, when progress towards genuine accountability emerged, it was blocked by the British Government and not brought to the floor of Westminster, despite their promising to do so time and time again. People know why. It is because they fear the truth of history. It is about preserving a narrative in which the British state presents itself as some kind of neutral actor, while suppressing the reality of collusion, shoot to kill, state violence and the arming of loyalist paramilitaries.

No. The British Government have never fully acknowledged their role in creating and sustaining the conditions for conflict in this part of Ireland. There has never been a meaningful apology for decades of discrimination, repression and state violence against the nationalist and republican community. While the Members opposite speak about victims, many families still wait for answers about collusion between British state agencies and loyalist paramilitary organisations. What do you know about the importation of weapons that were used to murder innocent people? What do you know about the role of Ulster Resistance, the armed wing of the DUP that was established by Ian Paisley and Peter Robinson? What do Peter Robinson, Jim Allister, Gregory Campbell, Sammy Wilson and other unionist grandees know about the importation of weapons from apartheid South Africa that ended up in the hands of loyalist paramilitaries across this island? Those weapons were used to murder people such as Kathleen O'Hagan, who was shot dead in her bedroom when she was seven months pregnant, while her baby son lay in a cot beside her and her other four sons were in the bedroom next door. Of those sons, three have passed away.

The truth is that this northern state was built upon institutional discrimination and maintained through extraordinarily repressive power for decades. Where is the apology from the UUP for 50 years of one-party sectarian rule? You shaped it all right: you shaped this place. You shaped it into something else, I can tell you. Where is the acknowledgement of discrimination against our people? Where is the recognition that nationalists were treated as second-class citizens and murdered on the streets and in their own homes? One of the clearest examples of that system was the Civil Authorities (Special Powers) Act 1922 — one of the most notorious emergency laws anywhere in Europe at the time. Under that Act, people could be interned without trial; homes could be searched without a warrant; meetings and publications were banned; citizens could be arrested on suspicion alone; and corporal punishment was permitted. Those powers were used overwhelmingly against the nationalist and republican community. It was a central instrument of repression within the northern state.

You should remember that legislation. B J Vorster, Minister of Justice in apartheid South Africa — I think that you have referred to him, sometimes, Mr Deputy Speaker — declared that he would exchange all of South Africa's security laws:

"for one clause of the Northern Ireland Special Powers Act".

An apartheid Minister looked here with envy. That tells you all you need to know about —

— what we are dealing with. Thank you.

983 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Uncertain: close call Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:46 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification