Debate contribution: Independent Inquiry into the Alleged Use of Wiretapping of Northern Ireland Journalists
Debate contribution by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 4 June 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Independent Inquiry into the Alleged Use of Wiretapping of Northern Ireland Journalists
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4493869
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Just yesterday, the PSNI Chief Constable, Jon Boutcher, was forced to deny claims that police had spied on so-called troublemaker journalists. He was forced to refute widespread media reports that the PSNI accessed the phone bills of journalists, who play a pivotal role in investigating the crimes of the state. Over four weeks after the Justice Minister faced calls to order a public inquiry into those allegations, the Chief Constable has ordered an independent review of the matter. First of all, the journalists will probably welcome any independent investigation that leads to disclosure. Secondly, that does not absolve the Minister of responsibility for calling a full public inquiry with the power to fully investigate these matters. The fact that the PSNI has to deny such spying allegations or order an investigation of any kind points to a complete lack of faith in that discredited police force. When I raised those concerns in the Assembly last month, I spoke about the case of Trevor Birney and Barry McCaffrey, who were pursued by the PSNI for exposing the truth about the Loughinisland atrocity. Police attempts to prosecute journalists for exposing PSNI collusion in the murder of six civilians is no accident. Many people will see it as a direct policy of a police force, the dark activities of which have purposefully denied justice to people from all walks of life. We do not need to scratch too far below the surface to identify how far that goes, because the PSNI has interfered with attempts to hold the state to account in the past. That is not just my opinion but an absolute fact. It is a police force that has harassed journalists to get them to reveal sources, who should be protected in any functioning democracy. The PSNI has treated journalists effectively as criminals by seizing journalistic materials and throwing journalists in cells for trying to investigate state murder. The PSNI has covered up collusion by the RUC by using public interest immunity (PII) certificates and all sorts of other dirty tricks to deny justice to families bereaved by state-backed paramilitary death squads. All of that is unacceptable. Time and time again, the PSNI has been proven to be a law unto itself. How many more journalists were spied on, and, as I have asked before, are MLAs being spied on or have they been spied on? Nobody knows the answers to those questions.
Sure, I will give way.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Member for his point, and I totally agree with him. It is effectively marking its own homework. I was just coming on to the point that it is utterly unacceptable that the PSNI Chief Constable has been allowed to take the initiative on investigating allegations of wiretapping of journalists' phones, because it is, as the Member said, effectively marking its own homework. I echo the words of Barry McCaffrey and Trevor Birney in saying that we cannot:
"allow the chief constable to pick the referee and set the rules of the game."
I reiterate that we need a fully independent public inquiry with investigative powers to expose the PSNI's anti-democratic activities. The Justice Minister can no longer take a hands-off approach when dealing with the police force. Saying that such issues are "operational matters" for the PSNI does not cut it any more, Minister. I support the motion and oppose the amendment.
566 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.18 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.75).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.89).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.12 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.19 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.10 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.75 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.18 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.89 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.05 |
| Adopts it | 0.06 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.96 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:36 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.