Question
Question on the NI Troubles Bill and the Chief Constable indicated that the PSNI response to the NI Affairs Committee could be shared with the Board.
Answer
Northern Ireland Affairs Committee
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) submission
29 October 2025
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
As part of its consideration of the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, which was introduced in the House of Commons on 14 October 2025, the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee has sought the views of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) in respect of the Government’s new proposals:-
i. to reform and strengthen the Legacy Commission’s independence, powers,
governance and/or accountability;
ii. in relation to Troubles-related inquests;
iii. in relation to information disclosure;
iv. in relation to the proposed Information Retrieval body;
v. whether the legislation, as introduced, meets the needs of victims, survivors,
and their families;
vi. whether the legislation, as introduced, will promote reconciliation;
vii. whether there are any gaps in the legislation.
It will be evident to the Committee that a number of the above matters either fall out of the responsibilities of the Chief Constable and/or represent matters in respect of which it would not be appropriate for the Chief Constable to comment on due to independence issues or ongoing litigation. Similarly, the Committee will be mindful that the purported changes contained within the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill are to be read together with the changes contained within the draft Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 (Remedial) Order (“the Remedial Order”) that was laid before both Houses by the Government on 4 December 2024.
Notwithstanding these issues, we are grateful for the opportunity to provide PSNI views to the Committee.
Introductory Remarks:
Following the announcement of the Legacy Commission we publicly welcomed any progress that effectively addresses legacy related issues. We fully acknowledge the hurt and suffering felt by families of those murdered and injured during the Troubles. Through personal experience of investigating such matters, the Chief Constable knows all too well that past failures to address legacy has resulted in transgenerational trauma and significant damage in public trust and confidence towards the police.
Whilst welcoming appropriate measures to address the past, we must also balance how such legislation will potentially impact on the PSNI, which continues to be under-resourced and under-funded yet facing increasing demand. Currently, legacy investigations cost the PSNI £24m a year. This cost includes the additional demand of servicing requests from the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR), for which we receive no funding. In the absence of support being provided to the PSNI to disclose information to the Legacy Commission, the entire experience is likely to fail.
Legacy costs come out of our core budget is provided for policing Northern Ireland today. It is not right that we have to use that budget for legacy. The changes associated with the reformed Legacy Commission will inevitably require further resources on the part of the PSNI. For the proposed changes to work, and to achieve the central goal of reconciliation, additional funding and resources for policing are essential.
Proposed Reforms:
As highlighted in your email of 16 October 2025, a range of proposed changes have been suggested by the Government in relation to both the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 (‘the Legacy Act’) and the ICRIR. Many of the changes relate to issues identified by the Courts concerning the protection of rights. The changes are broadly to be welcomed particularly to the extent that they will, in practice, meet the needs of victims, survivors, and their families. In respect of the particular changes it is noted that:-
- as to the reform and strengthening of the Legacy Commission’s independence, powers, governance and/or accountability, these changes are to be welcomed. The true impact of such measures will be dependent on how they operate in practice. The changes will however undoubtedly impact on PSNI both in terms of its disclosure responsibilities and the funding required to meet its interactions with the relevant bodies/structures.
- as to the reforms concerning Troubles-related inquests, the lifting of the prohibition on inquests and the introduction of new provisions concerning inquisitorial processes, these will inevitably increase demand on the PSNI. For instance, further obligations will be placed on the PSNI in relation to the disclosure of information to the Legacy Commission, the proposed changes concerning “stopped” inquests and changes concerning public inquisitorial proceedings. Such obligations primarily concern the review and disclosure of relevant material to the appropriate bodies. These obligations have been glacially slow previously due to limited resources.
- as to the reforms concerning information disclosure, we are supportive of any change that aims to provide the maximum amount of information to families. Again, much will depend on how such disclosure mechanisms operate in practice. Our view is that the entirety of PSNI records and systems are made directly available to the Legacy Commission.
- as to the proposed Information Retrieval body, this would again undoubtedly impact on PSNI both in terms of its facilitation of the same and the funding required to meet its interactions with the relevant bodies/structures.
- as to whether the legislation, as introduced, meets the needs of victims, survivors, and their families, this will be dependent on suitable provisions being put in place for appropriate funding and resourcing of the supporting organisations. The current arrangements would take a significant amount of time to provide families with updates on the loss of their loved ones be that through court processes or information reports. There needs to be a clear ‘victim focus’ in the legislation that allows victims and families to be central to the investigation, similar to the approach taken by ‘Kenova’. Through the Chief Constable’s Kenova work we are confident that the approach taken with an independent oversight group was essential to gaining the trust of victims and families.
- as to whether the legislation, as introduced, will promote reconciliation, the failure to effectively confront funding issues has had, and will continue, to have an ever-increasing detrimental impact on the trust and confidence of communities in policing, which is not conducive to the promotion of reconciliation in Northern Ireland. Reconciliation requires an information recovery and provision process for victims and families similar to the Kenova model. It is that very Kenova model that has been advocated for by victims groups.
- as to whether there are any gaps in the legislation; in broad terms the proposed legislation is silent on:
- Whether any mechanism exists or is required to refer troubles related alleged criminal conduct matter directly to ICRIR/Legacy Commission by the PSNI;
- Whether any express consideration has been given to ‘hybrid cases’ involving investigation of criminal conduct that occurred before and after the operation of the Legacy Act/Northern Ireland Troubles Bill;
- Practical outworking’s of the investigation of hybrid cases;
- Express provisions for the offset cost for the secondment of PSNI officers;
- Express provision for ICRIR/Legacy Commission officers to exercise covert powers.
Anticipated demand on PSNI:
The proposed changes will unavoidably increase demand on the PSNI. For instance, the proposed Schedule 4 contained in the Bill is the same as Schedule 8 of the Legacy Act insofar as the burden remains with the PSNI to classify documents as ‘sensitive or prejudicial’ at the point of handing the relevant material over to the Legacy Commission. This will be an onerous task, much of the information is in paper form and its content may be over classified. Objective assessments of the information content will be required. This process has been identified as requiring a dedicated PSNI team due to the anticipated demand. The proposed establishment of the Independent Commission on Information Retrieval also gives rise to similar practical implications. The Bill, similar to its predecessor, creates a statutory obligation on the PSNI with no consequential provision for funding. This process should be achieved through direct and unfettered access to PSNI records by the Legacy Commission and should not be the responsibility of the PSNI. Kenova did not seek such a predetermined assessment of legacy materials.
The central reforms/changes proposed by the Government will therefore place further demands/obligations on the PSNI. Despite requests, no additional funding has been identified to support the PSNI. The lack of additional funding inescapably impacts on the PSNI’s contemporary budget and associated operational abilities. By extension, these issues have the potential to impact on trust and confidence of communities in policing and the central desire to promote reconciliation.
The issue of funding as it relates to the proposed reforms should be viewed alongside the wider panoply of legacy related commitments which currently confront the PSNI. To provide the Committee with a full contextual understanding, these issues are addressed below.
Legacy Litigation:
The PSNI is a defendant in approximately 1000 legacy related claims. Those
proceedings are at various stages, with just under 400 actively progressing within the Court system. The Good Friday Agreement architecture made no provision for the payment of compensation to victims for unlawful behaviour during the troubles. Future litigation against the PSNI concerning troubles related conduct was not foreseen when the peace process architecture was being developed. Reforms introduced on foot of the Patten Report primarily concerned the structure, management and accountability of policing arrangements in Northern Ireland. As such, the Patten Report did not seek to address issues connected with legacy litigation costs and/or funding.
The Police (NI) Act 2000 sought to implement the recommendations of the Patten Report. The effect of the 2000 Act was that the body of Constables known as the RUC GC continued in being and was simply subsumed into the PSNI. From an organisational standpoint the 2000 Act did not therefore alter the existing liabilities of the RUC GC, or the funding methods required to address the same. Again, those extant liabilities have been subsumed into the PSNI.
Ultimately, the lack of specific engagement with the PSNI relating to the funding of legacy related litigation has had, and continues to have, an inimical impact on existing budgets. As information emerged into the public domain through publications of investigation findings, reviews, reports, court processes and investigative journalism, parties affected by unlawful state behaviour sought legal advice and recourse. By 2014 there were approximately 150 legacy civil actions against the PSNI in relation to legacy related issues and by the end of 2017, this had increased to over 800. The number of such civil actions continued to increase with the current number of claims sitting in excess of 1100. The stated intent of the Government to repeal the Section 43 of the Legacy Act, which prevented new claims being brought, means this number will continue to increase.1 Such legacy related liabilities are unique to Northern Ireland and represent a burden not carried by any other police force within the UK. Against the contemporary demands of Policing, the PSNI has not had sufficient resources to effectively manage legacy related disclosure requirements associated with these civil actions. It is staggering that the Northern Ireland Executive and Government have left the PSNI to manage these issues without support.
This situation has occurred notwithstanding that most of the claims arise from incidents that took place during direct rule and almost all engage National Security issues. To date, the only centralised attempt to address legacy litigation arose in the form of the Section 43 of the Legacy Act (whereby Parliament sought to impose a guillotine time limitation on claims being made for Tort, delict and fatal accident actions). The practical effect of that provision on PSNI was the receipt of further claims before the cut-off date. On one view by legislating in this area this provision (and its repeal) represents an important express recognition that Westminster considers legacy-related litigation as a reserved matter. Following the Dillon litigation, the Government has now stated its intention to repeal Section 43 of the Legacy Act. The PSNI is not aware of any separate provision designed to address legacy related litigation concerning the RUC GC.
There has never been any specific funding provided to PSNI to manage and pay
compensation relating to such troubles related litigation and the transferred liabilities of the RUC GC. The funding of such legacy related litigation comes from contemporary policing budgets, and this inevitably acts to the detriment of the PSNI as it seeks to maintain the trust and confidence of communities. Self-evidently, such outcomes do not speak to the vision of post conflict policing identified in the Patten Report. Rather, the impact on contemporary policing engendered by the issue of legacy litigation funding only serves to undermine the central aims of the Good Friday Agreement concerning the delivery of a post conflict society in Northern Ireland.
Public Inquiries:
The PSNI is a core participate for the Omagh Bombing Inquiry. The Omagh Bombing Inquiry is an independent statutory public inquiry, established by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. The Inquiry began formally in February 2024. The estimated cost of the lifetime of this enquiry to the PSNI is significant. Costs include the resourcing of research and disclosure of material, legal costs for representation and legal costs of one core participant who was a previous Chief Constable at the time.
On 11 September 2024, the Government announced that it intended pursuant
to Section 1 of the Inquiries Act 2005 to establish an independent statutory inquiry into the murder of Patrick Finucane. Separately, in May 2025 the Court of Appeal of Northern Ireland made a mandatory order requiring the Secretary of State to hold a public inquiry into the death of Sean Brown on 12 May 1997. That decision is under appeal to the UK Supreme Court.
At present it is clear that the PSNI will have to service each of these inquiries on a concurrent basis. It will not be lost on the Committee that such inquiries are resource intensive and carry a significant financial burden. It is difficult to estimate projected costs relating to the referenced inquiries. It is anticipated the Omagh Bomb Inquiry will cost the PSNI £15m and the Finucane Inquiry is expected to cost over £20m. No additional funding has been provided to the PSNI to meet their obligations in respect of the identified inquiries.
Legacy Inquests:
In February 2016, the then Lord Chief Justice, Sir Declan Morgan, proposed a five year plan for the completion of all outstanding legacy inquests. The initial caseload comprised 53 inquests relating to 94 deaths. Funding for the plan was announced in February 2019, and preliminary hearings began in September 2019. The (then) Presiding Coroner, Huddleston J, issued a ‘Legacy Inquests Case Management Protocol’ in January 2021 and the last of a series of updates was published by the (then) Presiding Coroner, Humphreys J, by way of a statement dated 17 November 2023. This addressed the implications of the Legacy Act for the outstanding Troubles related inquests within the five-year plan:-
“[23] I am, of course, conscious of the obligation imposed on coroners both by Rule 3 of the Coroners (Practice and Procedure) Rules 1963 and, where appropriate, article 2 of the ECHR to act promptly and to hold inquests as soon as practicable. [24] The ability to comply with such obligation is tempered by the finite nature of resources. As will be evident, there are a series of inquests which are part heard and where coroners intend to complete hearing evidence over the course of the next five months. The net result of this is that resources have been stretched to their limit. These are resources in terms of LIU solicitors and support staff, legal representatives and disclosure experts in the various state agencies, courtrooms and court staff, counsel with expertise in the field, expert witnesses and coroners. [25] Coroners have displayed a willingness to bring the inquests they are managing to conclusion before 1 May 2024. In order to achieve this, they will require the focussed input of all concerned.”
The operation of the Legacy Act in truncating the conclusion of a number of inquests at the same time had significant resource implications for the PSNI. The proposed changes intend to allow certain inquests that were previously halted by the 2023 Act to proceed, amend the Act’s disclosure regime, and ensure that in specific circumstances the Legacy Commission can hold public hearings, take sworn evidence from individuals, and allow families to have effective representation. In practice for the PSNI the resource required to service an Inquest under the previous system will not reduce. The Legacy Commission Inquests under the new Northern Ireland Troubles Bill are mirrored in a coronial process. Once again, the Bill makes no provision for funding for the PSNI.
Criminal Investigations - Legacy Investigation Branch:
The statutory remit of the ICRIR covers the period of the troubles from 1966 to April 1998. The PSNI therefore still retain a legal obligation to review all unsolved homicide cases that do not fall within the Act’s definition of ‘Troubles’ related deaths. In total this equates to 195 cases: 69 non-Troubles related (1969 to 1998 GFA) and 126 unsolved, homicide cases post-1998 GFA (to 2004).
In addition to these 195 cases there are 9 additional pre-legacy Act cases that are currently going through the criminal justice process and 13 being actively reviewed. At the present rate of throughput, it is anticipated it will take circa 10 years to complete this caseload.
Conclusion:
The financial challenges facing the PSNI are critical. As noted previously, the PSNI currently has an acute shortfall of officers, and no funding is available to address this. Legacy increases the pressure on the PSNI as it desperately tries to manage the unique challenges of policing a post conflict society. The PSNI’s core budget is designed to deliver policing in Northern Ireland today. That budget should therefore be providing police officers in our Neighbourhood and Response Teams, it should be paying for detectives to investigate and solve crimes, it should be deployed in tackling both organised crime and terrorist related activity. It should not be consumed in addressing legacy.
We reiterate that the failure to effectively confront funding issues has had, and will continue, to have an ever-increasing detrimental impact on the trust and confidence of communities in policing. Such outcomes are not conducive to the promotion of reconciliation in Northern Ireland. In the event that the Legacy Act creates additional burdens on PSNI resourcing, these costs must be fully understood and reimbursed.
We are strongly of the view that the Legacy Commission should have direct and
unfettered access to records without any requirement for the organisation holding the records assessing the material. The overriding priority should be the proper disclosure of information in these cases to families of victims.
Les Allamby