The picture of RUC obstruction and partiality which has emerged this week in the report of the Independent Commission for Police Complaints is a highly disturbing one. The ICPC inquiry had been charged with directing and reporting on the conduct of the RUC's internal investigation into alleged death threats by RUC officers against solicitor Rosemary Nelson who was murdered last week in Lurgan. It would be difficult to conceive of a more damning critique, at a critical time, of the work of supposedly professional police officers. The Chief Constable, Sir Ronnie Flanagan, said yesterday he hopes to publish "within 24 hours" a further report by a senior officer of the London Metropolitan Police, Commander Niall Mulvihill, who was brought in after the RUC investigation, headed by a superintendent, ran into the sands of non co-operation and obstruction. The obstructiveness was not merely passive, however. Officers' statements, prepared in advance of interview, "undermined the possibility of full and candid responses to important questions", the report concluded. It is clear that a relatively large group of RUC officers closed ranks in order to protect members. Even their own superiors at the highest levels within the RUC were unable to penetrate the defensive shield.
Against this background, it is clear that the Chief Constable had little choice but to seek what amounts to outside supervision in the investigation into the murder of Rosemary Nelson. Confidence in the RUC has been dealt a heavy blow and not just among the constituency with which Ms Nelson worked but among many of those in the nationalist population who would be broadly supportive of the police and who are sympathetic to the difficult and dangerous task they undertake. The RUC's excellent work at Drumcree last year, which cost the life of one constable, with many others injured, had done much to convince middleground nationalists that it could, and would, operate as an impartial police service in new political circumstances. That conviction may be seriously diminished in the wake of Ms Nelson's murder and with the revelations of this week's report.
In defence of the RUC it will be argued that the vast majority of members discharge their duties impartially and effectively and that the circumstances in the Lurgan-Portadown area are uniquely difficult. Police officers, young men with families, have been brutally and callously murdered there by the IRA. In at least one instance the chief suspect was a client of Rosemary Nelson. She was reportedly regarded by some police officers as a "Provo lawyer" - whatever that may be - and there must be little doubt that she used the law to the full benefit of her clients and to the anger of friends and colleagues of the murdered officers. This may explain the local circumstances in the Lurgan-Portadown area but it cannot excuse or condone them. It is little credit to the RUC if it can maintain its professional standards in the tranquil suburbs of North Down but not in the contested streets and estates of mid-Ulster. Nor is this merely a question of one or two rogue policemen exceeding the rules. What the ICRC report indicates is the failure of the institution to regulate itself.
As the fallback date for the establishment of the new executive draws near, all political resources over coming days will be brought to bear upon the decommissioning issue. It has proven a difficult obstacle and it is far from certain, at this point, that it can be got over. But even if it is, beyond it lies an even more difficult summit to be attained - the establishment of an acceptable and effective police service for the entire community. The developments of recent days must make that an even more daunting challenge.