Court of Appeal delivers Bloody Sunday Decision
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Neutral Citation | Summary of judgment - in re Gerry Duddy and others for judicial review (Bloody Sunday) |
| Court | Court of Judicature (NI) |
| Date | 23 March 2022 |
Judicial Communications Office
1
23 March 2022
COURT OF APPEAL DELIVERS BLOODY SUNDAY DECISION
Summary of Judgment
The Court of Appeal
1
today quashed the PPS’s decision to discontinue the prosecution of Soldier F
for the murder of William McKinney in 1972. It directed the PPS to reconsider the decision. The
court upheld the PPS’s decision not to prosecute soldiers for the deaths of five other civilians killed
on Bloody Sunday on the basis that the soldiers’ evidence was obtained by compulsion.
In paragraphs [12] – [34] of its judgment, the court outlined the PPS decisions on prosecution dated
14 March 2019 and the review decisions dated 29 September 2020. It also set out in paragraphs [35] –
[39] the discontinuance decision issued to the family of William McKinney by correspondence dated
2 July 2021. This was on the basis that, in light of the ruling in R v Soldiers A & C [2021] NICC 3,
there was “insufficient admissible evidence to provide a reasonable prospect of conviction” in the
case and that the test for prosecution was no longer met. The core issues for determination by the
court were:
Did the PPS err in deciding that there was no reasonable prospect that soldiers’ own
statements/evidence would be admissible against themselves in any future prosecution?
Did the PPS err in deciding that there was no reasonable prospect that soldiers’
statements/evidence could be admissible as evidence against other soldiers in the
prosecution of Soldier F?
Were adequate reasons given to the families to explain the decisions made?
Was there a breach of the Victims’ Charter in the way the PPS interacted with the families in
the McKinney case?
The court referred to the three phases of evidence gathering and investigation in this case in
paragraphs [45] – [51]. These were:
The Royal Military Police (“RMP”) statements taken in 1972;
The statements taken shortly thereafter in 1972 for the Widgery Tribunal. These were taken
for the purpose of cross checking against the RMP statements to establish whether any
differences could be reconciled and explained. In some cases this resulted in soldiers being
interviewed again and further statements taken;
The evidence from the Saville Inquiry.
Judicial review of PPS decisions
The decision of the PPS not to prosecute is amenable to judicial review. Successful judicial reviews
in this area are rare underlining the need for the court to respect the fact that the task of deciding
when, and when not, to prosecute is primarily one for the independent prosecuting authority:
1
The panel was Keegan LCJ, Maguire LJ and Scoffield J. Keegan LCJ delivered the judgment of the court.
To continue reading
Request your trial