Written evidence from the Commission for
Victims and Survivors
SUMMARY
The Commission for Victims and Survivors has
a responsibility to respond to the proposals of the Consultative
Group on the Past as a result of its statutory remit to promote
the interests of victims and survivors and its duties and powers,
including the right to advise government;
The publication of the Consultative Group on the
Past report and recommendations has led to a number of problems
and the Commission for Victims and Survivors believes a viable
formula must be found to address these;
The Commission for Victims and Survivors seeks to
contribute to the development of a viable formula, to facilitate
reflection on the Consultative Group on the Past recommendations
and to construct a formula based, on broad agreement, for dealing
with the past;
The Commission for Victims and Survivors aims
to seek views on the Consultative Group on the Past recommendations
and the extent to which meet the aims of the Outline Draft Strategic
Approach for Victims and Survivors published by the Office of
the First Minister and deputy First Minister.
There cannot be an operational gap between current
provision in the review of historical cases and any future arrangements;
Further dialogue is needed to build upon the
opportunity that exists, based on the recommendations of the Consultative
Group on the Past to address the needs of victims and survivors.
1. THE COMMISSION
FOR VICTIMS
AND SURVIVORS
1.1 The Commission for Victims and Survivors
(the Commission) was established in June 2008 under the Victims
and Survivors (Northern Ireland) Order 2006, as amended by the
Commission for Victims and Survivors Act (Northern Ireland) 2008.
1.2 The Commission is a Non-departmental Public
Body (NDPB) of the Office of the First Minister and deputy First
Minister (OFMDFM). The principal aim of the Commission is to promote
the interests of victims and survivors.
1.3 The statutory duties of the Commission
include:
— Promoting an awareness of matters relating
to the interests of victims and survivors and of the need to safeguard
those interests.
— Keeping under review the adequacy and
effectiveness of law and practice affecting the interests of victims
and survivors.
— Keeping under review the adequacy and
effectiveness of services provided for the victims and survivors
by bodies or persons.
— Advising the Secretary of State, the
Executive Committee of the Assembly and any body or person providing
services for victims and survivors on matters concerning the interests
of victims and survivors.
— Ensuring that the views of victims and
survivors are sought concerning the exercise of the Commission's
functions.
— Making arrangements for a forum for consultation
and discussion with victims and survivors.
1.4 The general powers of the Commission
include:
— Undertaking or commissioning research
or educational activities concerning the interests of victims
and survivors.
— Issuing guidance on best practice in
relation to matters concerning the interests of victims and survivors.
— Compiling information, providing advice
or information and publishing research or advice on any matter
concerning the interests of victims and survivors.
— Making representations to any body or
person concerning the interests of victims and survivors.
1.5 The Commissioners are Patricia MacBride,
Brendan McAllister, Bertha McDougall and Michael Nesbitt. The
interests of victims and survivors are at the centre of all the
work of the Commission. The Commission wishes to work collaboratively
with individual victims and survivors and with groups who serve
victims and survivors to assess their needs and improve services
provided to them. It has met informally with the Committee in
Belfast in May 2008.
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 The Commission welcomes the opportunity
to provide evidence to the Committee regarding the feasibility
of implementing the proposals of the Report of the Consultative
Group on the Past. We wish to set out our response under three
headings:
— The operational implications for the
bodies currently overseeing the review of historical cases.
3. CVS PROPOSALS
FOR FACILITATING
DIALOGUE ON
DEALING WITH
THE PAST
3.1 In keeping with our statutory role,
the Commission's aim is to promote an approach to dealing with
the past which upholds the interests of victims and survivors.
3.2 The Commission's responsibility to respond
to the Consultative Group's proposals has the following basis:
— Our statutory remit to promote the interests
of victims and survivors and our duties and powers, including
the right to advise government.
— OFMDFM policy on victims, which holds
that there is an inter-connectedness between serving present need,
dealing with the past and building the future. The policy also
asserts that the Commission should involve victims in dealing
with the legacy of the past.
— Our work programme, approved by Ministers,
which states our intention to advise them on dealing with the
past.
3.3 The publication of the CGP report and
recommendations has led to a number of problems,including the
following:
— An initial focus on the recommendation
to make a recognition payment of £12,000 to the next
of kin of those killed as a result of the conflict caused initial
widespread negative reaction and created conditions where many
elements of the report were left unexamined. We believe that explanation
of the recommendations in their entirety needs to be undertaken
to allow public debate to take place.
— The resultant announcement by the Secretary
of State that he would not implement that particular recommendation,
in the near future at very least, contributed to a concern about
the status of the report.
— There has been a lack of endorsement
by the First and deputy First Minister.
— It is unclear to whom ministerial responsibility
for implementation of recommendations will fall. That creates
additional uncertainty as to whether implementation will take
place or be held as a hostage to fortune depending on the prevailing
political climate.
3.4 The Commission believes that a formula
must be found which addresses these and other difficulties associated
with the CGP report. The Commission will seek to contribute to
the creation of a formula which is viable. Viability could be
understood as having the following elements:
— The support of victims and survivors
of the conflict.
— Acknowledgement and development of understanding
within the broader community that it is necessary to deal with
the legacy of the conflict in order for us to be reconciled as
a community to moving forward together.
— Endorsement from OFMDFM as a Department,
in line with its 10-year strategy on victims.
— Political consensus between the parties
in the Assembly, between the British and Irish Governments, and
between the Assembly and the two governments.
— Support from civic leaders.
3.5 The Commission has two objectives it
wishes to fulfil:
— To facilitate reflection on the Consultative
Group's recommendations.
— Constructing a formula for dealing with
the past, informed by those reflections.
3.6 We intend to take this forward by working
simultaneously on four levels:
3.6.1 We intend to use the Forum for victims
and survivors, which we have a statutory duty to establish, as
a formal mechanism for consultation and discussion. We will also,
in the course of our work, take into consideration the views of
victims and survivors who are not part of any support organisation
or members of the Forum, in order to seek to represent as broad
a view as possible.
3.6.2 We propose to establish a working group
with the Department of the Office of the First and Deputy First
Minister. Primarily, this group will establish how proposals for
dealing with the past would be integrated within the Department's
proposed draft Strategy and proposals for the establishment of
a Victims and Survivors Service.
3.6.3 Political engagement would include meetings
with the parties in the Assembly, the British and Irish Governments
and international governments from whom ideas and/or experience
can be gleaned.
3.6.4 In terms of civic engagement, we intend
to meet with Church leaders, the PSNI, the HET, PONI, Criminal
Justice/Human Rights NGOs, Third Sector leaders, other commissions
and other interested parties.
4. FUTURE PROVISION
FOR VICTIMS
AND SURVIVORS
4.1 The Committee will no doubt be aware
that OFMDFM have published an Outline Draft Strategic Approach
for Victims and Survivors.[3])
4.2 The overall aims of the strategy are to:
— Put in place comprehensive arrangements
to ensure that the voice of victims and survivors is represented
and acted upon at a governmental and policy level.
— Secure through the provision of an appropriate
range of support services and other initiatives a measurable improvement
in the wellbeing of victims and survivors.
— Assist victims and survivors, where this
is consistent with their wishes and wellbeing, to play a central
role, as part of wider society in addressing the legacy of the
past.
— Assist victims and survivors to contribute
to building a shared and better future.
4.3 The Commission endorses the aims of
the draft strategy as stated, and through the development process
outlined at 3 above, intend to seek the views of a range
of stakeholders on the extent to which the Consultative Group
on the Past's recommendations meet those aims.
5. THE OPERATIONAL
IMPLICATIONS FOR
BODIES CURRENTLY
OVERSEEING THE
REVIEW OF
HISTORICAL CASES
5.1 As stated above, the Commission believes
that a process for dealing with the past based on broad agreement
is the best way forward for those impacted by the conflict. What
we are clear on, however, is that there cannot be any operational
gap between current provision in this area and any future arrangements.
5.2 The work of the Historical Enquiries Team,
we must acknowledge, has come in for significant criticism, but
unless and until there is agreement on an alternative investigative
process, HET's work must continue to be resourced. Likewise, we
see the work of the Police Ombudsman in terms of historical cases
as requiring continuation until such times as an alternative process
is put in place.
5.3 In this respect, we are mindful of the
strain in terms of budget and human resources that has been put
upon the HET in taking on investigations in respect of Operation
Stafford. Should this re-occur, or should strain on resources
cause anything less than robust examination of historical cases,
community confidence in their efficacy will be eroded. This in
turn will erode confidence in any process designed to replace
it.
5.4 It is worth bearing in mind the length
of time HET has taken to review chronologically the cases it undertakes.
Currently, open files under review are for the period up to 1974,
with cases not investigated in chronological order bringing the
number of open and concluded investigations to approximately one
third of HET's case load.
5.5 It is of concern that proposals for
the Legacy Commission to complete its work within five years may
not be realistic. Discussions with stakeholders, as outlined above,
will inform our decisions on that matter.
5.6 In terms of Tribunals of Inquiry, the
Commission believes that there currently exists no credible alternative
investigative process. In that context, Public Inquiries will
continue to be sought, not necessarily because of their proven
efficacy, but because they are the only option where particular
events have given rise to public concern.
5.7 Government must clearly demonstrate
its commitment to ensuring that any process of handover or change
is seamless and is in the best interests, and indeed has the support
of victims and survivors.
6. CONCLUSION
6.1 An opportunity exists, based upon the
recommendations of the Consultative Group on the Past, to develop
new, robust processes that address the need for investigation,
truth, justice and provision of services that victims and survivors
seek and have articulated, based upon the Initial Review of Need
published by this organisation in January 2009.
6.2 The Commission for Victims and Survivors
would support such a process which can have the confidence of
the majority of the community, whilst acknowledging that it will
not be supported by all. That is not to say that the recommendations
of CGP ought to be implemented as made. We believe it is only
through further dialogue, which will be difficult and contentious
as all matters of conflict resolution are, that a picture of what
is achievable and ultimately acceptable to victims and survivors
and the broader community on these islands who have been impacted
by the conflict will emerge
10 April 2009
3 http://www.ofmdfmni.gov.uk/outline-draft-strategy-for-victims-and-survivors-consultation-paper.pdf Back
| 
