From left, solicitor Fearghal Shiels, Pearse Jordan’s father Hugh, mother Teresa and brother Matt outside the Royal Courts of Justice in Belfast

" data-large-file="https://madden-finucane.com/files/2016/11/jordan-family.jpg" class="size-full wp-image-10348" src="https://madden-finucane.com/files/2016/11/jordan-family.jpg" alt="" width="885" height="560" /> From left, solicitor Fearghal Shiels, Pearse Jordan's father Hugh, mother Teresa and brother Matt outside the Royal Courts of Justice in Belfast

A decision not to prosecute two police officers in connection with the killing of an IRA man was "irredeemably flawed", the High Court heard today.

Counsel for the mother of Pearse Jordan argued that the pair should have been charged with committing perjury at the inquest into his death.

Senior judges were told that the Public Prosecution Service violated her human rights and breached its own code in determining they should not face a criminal trial.

"The PPS decision is irredeemably flawed," Karen Quinlivan KC submitted.

Pearse Jordan, 22, was shot dead by an RUC officer as he ran from a stolen car stopped on the Falls Road in west Belfast in November 1992.

His death was one of several high-profile cases in Northern Ireland involving allegations that police were involved in shoot-to-kill incidents.

In 2016 an inquest was unable to reach a concluded view about whether the use of lethal force was justified.

But the coroner, Mr Justice Horner, found that two former members of the RUC, Officers M and Q, had given untruthful evidence.

Amid suspicions that one or both of them edited the original logbook on the day of the shooting, he concluded they may have committed perjury or tried to pervert the course of justice.

The coroner went on to report both officers to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

In 2024, following a previous legal action, the PPS decided not to prosecute M and Q after concluding there was insufficient available evidence for a reasonable prospect of obtaining a conviction on any offence.

Teresa Jordan, the IRA man's mother, is seeking a judicial review in a bid to have that determination quashed.

Her legal team contend that it violated Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and amounted to a breach of the PPS code for prosecutors.

In what she described as a circumstantial case against the officers, Ms Quinlivan claimed there is a cumulative body of evidence from multiple credible sources to support the case for prosecutions.

She told the court it was difficult to comprehend how the PPS could safely reach any decision about the plausibility of the officers' accounts without them being formally questioned.

"The PPS have erred in concluding that M and Q should not be interviewed under caution in respect of this matter," counsel stated.

The case, being heard by a three-judge panel, continues next week.

Speaking outside court Mrs Jordan's solicitor, Fearghal Shiels of Madden and Finucane, said: "We contend that the PPS took an extraordinary eight years to arrive at a decision not to prosecute the two officers… which is unlawful and failed to consider all of the available evidence.

"The PPS entirely failed to discharge its functions by directing that the officers concerned be questioned under caution.

"We are asking the Court to quash the decision taken and declare it unlawful."

Belfast Telegraph