Ruling threatens Bloody Sunday Inquiry
The future of the Saville inquiry into Bloody Sunday looks uncertain
after the High Court in London granted four soldiers who took part in
the attack leave to appeal against the partial removal of anonymity
on Monday 1 February. The ruling was made without informing relatives
of those murdered after Mr Justice Collins also ruled that it was not
necessary to let them know. The news was passed on to the solicitors
representing the families by Lord Saville.
The four soldiers concerned, known hitherto only as Soldiers B, O, U
and V, were granted leave by Mr Justice Collins to seek a judicial
review of a decision taken by Lord Saville last year which offered
them only limited anonymity, permitting the use of their surnames and
first names if it was considered sufficiently relevant.
It seems that Lord Saville will allow the judicial review to go to a
hearing in London today and solicitors representing the families have
sought the right to participate in that hearing.
Greg McCartney, representing the family of Jim Wray, said that ``With
an English law lord and two Commonwealth judges, there was an
international aspect but now the English judiciary appears to be
having a say''. Representatives of the families intend turning up at
the high court today ``to demand to be heard.''
McCartney said that his clients may refuse to participate further in
the inquiry should Lord Saville's ruling be overturned, saying that
it was inconceivable that those responsible for the killing of Jim
Wray and others should use the law to conceal their identities. The
Wray family initially withdrew from the inquiry shortly after it was
established when they learned of the intention to grant total
anonymity to soldiers who fired shots on Bloody Sunday. Only when
Lord Saville ruled that he would not allow full anonymity did the
Wray family agree to co-operate with the inquiry.
Peter Madden, of Madden and Finucane, the firm of solicitors
representing a number of the families of the dead, expressed his
concern that holding the hearing in London would effectively prevent
his clients from attending. He also said he was extremely
disappointed that the immediate relatives of the dead were not
considered to be sufficiently ``directly involved'' to be informed of
Justice Collins' ruling.
![[An Phoblacht]](http://republican-news.org/graphics/title_gifs/aprn.gif)