Application By Geraldine Finucane

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND

QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION (JUDICIAL REVIEW)

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY GERALDINE FINUCANE FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW AND IN THE MATTER OF A DECISIONS OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR NORTHERN IRELAND

ORDER 53 STATEMENT

 

1. The applicant is Geraldine Finucane, c/o Madden & Finucane, Solicitors, 88 Castle Street, Belfast BT1 1HE

2. The applicant seeks the following relief

a) An order of mandamus compelling the Secretary of State to publish the Cory collusion inquiry report into the murder of her husband, Patrick Finucane;

b) An order of mandamus compelling the Secretary of State to indicate publicly the recommendation of the Cory collusion inquiry report into the murder of her husband, Patrick Finucane;

c) An order of mandamus compelling the Secretary of State to inform the applicant of the recommendation of the Cory collusion inquiry report into the murder of her husband, Patrick Finucane;

d) A declaration that the applicant is entitled to a copy of/access to the report;

e) A declaration that the application is entitled to be informed of the report’s recommendation;

f) Such further and other relief as the court may deem appropriate;

g) Leave on the papers without the need for an inter partes leave hearing since the papers clearly disclose an arguable case for judicial review and an inter partes hearing would clearly lead to more delay and expense;

h) An expedited hearing;

i) Costs.

3. The grounds upon which the said relief is sought are

a) The government made a commitment to publish the report;

b) In failing to publish the report the Secretary of State is acting in breach of the applicant’s rights pursuant to Article 2 of the Convention and in breach of section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998;

c) In failing to publicise the report’s recommendation the Secretary of State is acting in breach of the applicant’s rights pursuant to Article 2 of the Convention and in breach of section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998;

d) In failing to inform the applicant of the report’s recommendation the Secretary of State is acting in breach of the applicant’s rights pursuant to Article 2 of the Convention and in breach of section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998;

e) The applicant had a legitimate expectation that once the report was delivered to the government

i. It would be published without any or undue delay;

ii. Judge Cory’s recommendation would be publicised without any or undue delay;

iii. She would be informed of Judge Cory’s recommendation without any or undue delay;

f) There has been undue delay in

i. The publication of the report;

ii. The publication of the report’s recommendation;

iii. Informing the applicant of the report’s recommendation;

g) Judge Cory has said in his report on the murders of Chief Superintendent Breen and Superintendent Buchanan

2.167 This case, like that of Finucane, Hamill, Wright, Nelson and the Gibsons was specifically selected as one of those to be reviewed to determine if there was collusion and, if so, to direct a public inquiry. In light of this provision in the original agreement failure to hold such an inquiry as quickly as possible might be thought to be a denial of the original agreement, which appears to have been an important and integral part of the peace process. The failure to do so could be seen as a cynical breach of faith which could have unfortunate consequences for the Peace Accord.

h) The Secretary of State’s decision to withhold publication of the report is unfair, unreasonable and unlawful

i) The Secretary of State’s decision to withhold publication of the recommendation is unfair, unreasonable and unlawful

j) The Secretary of State’s failure to inform the applicant of Judge Cory’s recommendation is unfair, unreasonable and unlawful

 

Dated this day of January 2004

Signed…………………………

Madden & Finucane,
Solicitors for the applicant
88 Castle Street
Belfast BT1 1HE