Recommendations from the Victims Commission, established in the aftermath of the Belfast Agreement, are more radical than they appear at first sight. They are comprehensive, thoughtful and generous. And if - in the cases of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of twenty-five years ago - they do not go as far as some of the relatives of the victims might wish in recommending a public, sworn inquiry, what is proposed is still a considerable advance and perhaps all that could be expected in the circumstances. In particular, the recommendation that all Garda files on the incidents should be made available to the legal teams of those families taking a case before the European Court of Human Rights, or to the court itself, must be welcomed.
The opening up of Garda and other security files dealing with Northern-related violence, which have been closed to the families of victims up to this, is likely to be the most significant development arising from the report by the former Tanaiste, Mr John Wilson, who headed the Victims Commission. As he himself noted, nobody has been made to answer for the 33 Dublin and Monaghan murders of May 1974. Garda reports on the bombings were withheld from the families of those killed and from the 400 injured, in spite of legal actions through the courts. The vacuum created, Mr Wilson said, was filled by speculation and rumour, damaging to the Garda Siochana.
In order to address this situation, the Victims Commissioner has recommended the establishment of a non-statutory independent inquiry, headed by a former judge of the High Court, who would conduct investigations in private and publish a final report. Should it be necessary, in order to secure access to files and to question witnesses, the inquiry could be given any statutory powers requested by the judge. The terms of reference suggested would seek to establish the facts, circumstances and causes of the bombing; the nature, extent and adequacy of the Garda investigation, including the adequacy of co-operation with authorities in Northern Ireland and the adequacy of the scientific analyses of forensic evidence; the reasons why no prosecutions took place including whether and, if so, by whom and to what extent the investigation was impeded, and any other matter connected with or relevant to the establishment of the truth.
In addition, Mr Wilson said the judge should also inquire into the murder of Seamus Ludlow in Dundalk in 1976 and into a number of other cases where no prosecutions took place and no official report on the crime was ever made public. Public confidence in the garda was an essential element of policing with consent, he noted and he recommended that all relevant reports - cognisant of the need to preserve the confidentiality and safety of informants - should be made available to the families of victims. The Government, he said, should urge the British Government to do likewise with the Stalker/Sampson and Stevens' reports.
Other aspects of the report deal with increased levels of compensation, the establishment of memorials and commemorations to tell the victims' stories and a day of remembrance. It was too early, Mr Wilson observed, in the aftermath of the Belfast Agreement, to talk about a physical memorial or monument to the victims of Northern Ireland violence because there were widely differing and strongly held opinions about what or who should be commemorated. All in all, the report marks a considerable advance in terms of promised openness and transparency. The work of the judicial inquiry is likely to begin in the autumn.