Sir Ronnie Flanagan has come out fighting as he challenges the Police Ombudsman's report questioning his leadership, and the policehandling of the Omagh investigation, writes Gerry MoriartyNorthern Editor
Weighing Nuala O'Loan's report against Sir Ronnie Flanagan's is a little like art appreciation: it's a subjective business, a lot is in the eyes of the beholder, and sometimes judgment is determined by whether the eyes are orange or green.
Sir Ronnie Flanagan promised a "robust" response to the Police Ombudsman Mrs O'Loan's scathing comments about his and the RUC's handling of the Omagh bombing investigation.
And robust is an accurate description of his rejoinder. There is no doubt the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) has put up a detailed and arguable case for the defence.
The Irish Times saw a copy of his lengthy and confidential report yesterday, and at first reading it seems at the very least that Sir Ronnie has muddied the waters and has reciprocated some of the damage the Ombudsman inflicted on him last month.
It is interesting that a senior Garda officer is due to be present with Sir Ronnie when he briefs Omagh families today. Is this a rather political Garda endorsement of Sir Ronnie? Last night Mrs O'Loan and her team were working their way through his bulky report. A spokesman said Mrs O'Loan was standing by her findings and recommendations.
As stated here before, Sir Ronnie's strategy in seeking to defend himself and the police was to launch an assault on Mrs O'Loan's findings on three fronts: to challenge the credibility of the informant Kevin Fulton, who warned of an attack at an unspecified location in Northern Ireland around the time of the bombing; to dismiss the relevance of an August 4th, 1998 tip-off about a gun-and-rocket attack on Omagh on August 15th; and, while admitting to certain defects, contending the post-Omagh explosion investigation was reasonably well organised and managed.
Sir Ronnie states that Kevin Fulton was generally regarded as an "intelligence nuisance", despite the Ombudsman's view he was a significant informant. BBC ran a story last night that MI5 also held that Fulton could not be trusted as a useful informant.
Mrs O'Loan conceded it was unlikely that Fulton's information could have prevented Omagh, prompting the tart response from Sir Ronnie that this "seriously underplayed the lack of specific information" he provided.
However, Sir Ronnie accepted her complaint that information from Fulton on July 23rd and August 12th, 1998 could not be located within the Special Branch and that "this represented an unacceptable breakdown in administrative procedures". He did not accept any element of conspiracy to this breakdown, as the Ombudsman's investigators may suspect.
The Ombudsman complained that the RUC failed to link the Omagh bombing, which claimed the lives of 29 people and twin unborn girls, to previous dissident attacks at Moira, Lisburn and Banbridge. Sir Ronnie asserts this was plain wrong: that the investigation team made this linkage.
Mrs O'Loan's report complained that there was a reduction by 42 per cent in the strength of the investigation team two months after the explosion.
Sir Ronnie responds that this was simply because these were officers who had completed a specific task - interviewing people in the town on the day of the explosion and those treated in hospital - and were no longer required in the investigation.
Much of Mrs O'Loan's criticisms of the post-bombing investigation were based on an internal RUC review of the inquiry. Her report implied that this was withheld from her officers, but Sir Ronnie is dismissive of this.
He says that prior to the Ombudsman's investigation there was a press release about this review, and that details of the review were also contained in the annual RUC report of that period. The suggestion is that not only was the implication false but that her investigators should have been aware of this information.
At the very least, Sir Ronnie has put up a reasonable case to defend his leadership and the RUC investigating team. However, as stated, there is a subjective element to the different points made by Sir Ronnie and Mrs O'Loan. There appears to be merit in different aspects of both reports.
One wonders, however, whether Mrs O'Loan would now consider that she would have been wiser to await Sir Ronnie's response before pressing ahead with publication of her report last month. Had she done so, her findings might not have been so fierce and controversial.
Whether a clear victor emerges from this politically sensitive scrap remains to be seen. Both heavyweights could end up on the canvass.
It may be the function of the Policing Board to arbitrate between the two sides. Last night most Policing Board members were making the right noises. As Omagh SDLP MLA and board member Mr Joe Byrne said, the main priority was to defend the PSNI and the Police Ombudsman's office and not allow this dispute to degenerate into a politically disastrous clash of personal ities.
