This post was originally published on this site.
MPs have voted to remove a measure providing conditional immunity from prosecutions for Troubles-era crimes from the previous Conservative government’s legacy act.
The controversial clause had already been found to be unlawful and was opposed by Northern Ireland parties and victims’ groups.
It would have enabled anyone to avoid prosecution for offences related to the Troubles, if they had provided information about unresolved cases.
Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn said whatever the previous legislation’s intentions, it had “fundamentally failed”.
MPs were also asked to support scrapping the bar on future legacy compensation cases.
Benn said the last government had chosen to legislate to give amnesty to both veterans and perpetrators on the basis of drawing a line under the past, but that by doing so they had caused a lack of “trust” with all communities in Northern Ireland.
He brought what is a known as a remedial order to the Commons on Wednesday evening, with MPs voting by 373 to 106 in favour of it.
Separately, the Labour government is in the process of repealing the previous legacy act and replacing it with new legislation, which is currently going through Parliament.
It includes a new legacy commission, born out of the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR), which will have independent oversight.
The government said the deal involved a package of protections for veterans, including “a protection in old age”.
Some backbench Tory MPs have called on the government to provide immunity from prosecution for those who served in the armed forces.
But Sinn Féin’s vice-president and, Northern Ireland First Minister Michelle O’Neill, said she was “concerned” by any suggestion that the government could renege on commitments to victims and survivors, if it gave veterans special treatment in new legislation.
Benn told MPs the government did not agree with immunity “as a matter of principle” and that those who served in the armed forces had to abide by the rule of law.
Shadow Northern Ireland Secretary Alex Burghart said while there had not been cross-party support for the Conservative Party’s legisation, there was “not party support for his legislation in Northern Ireland either”.
“There are plenty of people in Northern Ireland who would like to move on and respect the decision to a draw a line,” he added.
Democratic Unionist Party leader Gavin Robinson said his party would not vote for the remedial order, citing a range of reasons.
He questioned where additional funding would come from to deal with future Troubles-era civil actions, which will now be able to resume as a result of the remedial order.
“The secretary of state lectures Northern Ireland continually about living within our budget,” he said.
“He has expanded the scope of the legacy investigations exponentially… has he suggested for one moment he is going to increase the budget available? No.
“Is he going to pick up the tab?”
“The decisions being made by this chamber now and in the future… have a material impact on our ability to move onto the future.”
The Police Service of Northern Ireland is already facing scores of civil litigation and compensation claims linked to the Troubles.
Social Democratic and Labour Party leader Claire Hanna said the decision to end the immunity clause “goes some way to restoring the rule of law to legacy processes”, but that it was only the beginning of trying to create a space for truth and justice.
Alliance MP Sorcha Eastwood agreed with the decision to pass the remedial order, insisting that the UK should not “lower its standards”.
“We should be able to stand by the rule of law wherever we are deployed… we should maintain it and we should not lower our standards because we worry about the standards of terrorists and the evidence available to them,” she said.
Ulster Unionist Party MP Robin Swann was among those who questioned the timing of the remedial order, and called for it to be delayed until ongoing legal appeals against parts of the legislation have concluded.
Traditional Unionist Voice leader Jim Allister said Labour’s move was motivated by “one thing and one thing only – appeasing the government of the Irish Republic which wants to drag this United Kingdom before the bar of the European Court of Human Rights”.
“It’s not that it’s to cease to implement laws with which they disagree because those aspects of the previous legacy act are already removed from effectiveness,” he said.
Independent MP for North Down Alex Easton said he had “deep concerns” about the new legacy framework being proposed by the British and Irish governments.
