The Irish Government was “correct” in arguing the North’s discredited legacy legislation was incompatible with international human rights law, the Northern Secretary told the House of Commons on Wednesday.
Asked if there was any guarantee Ireland would withdraw the legal challenge it has taken against the UK over the Legacy Act, Hilary Benn said it was “a matter for them”, but as soon as that incompatibility was remedied then there would be “no basis for the inter-state case any more”.
Mr Benn was speaking during a debate on a remedial order to remove the parts of the legislation granting conditional immunity to perpetrators and blocking Troubles-related civil cases.
These provisions were ruled to be in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) by the High Court in Belfast in 2024.
MPs voted by 373 to 106 to approve the changes to the legislation. The remedial order will now proceed to the House of Lords where it must be voted on before the law can be amended.
The Legacy Act, which was introduced by the previous Conservative government and became law in 2023, replaced existing methods of criminal and civil investigations and inquests with inquiries carried out by a new investigative body.
It was widely opposed, including by victims’ families and support organisations, all the main political parties north and south, and by the European Union and United Nations.
Last year the Labour government in London agreed with Dublin a new, joint approach to dealing with the legacy of the Troubles in fulfilment of its pledge to “repeal and replace” the “failed” Legacy Act. Separate legislation to implement this is proceeding through the UK Parliament.
Addressing the Commons on Wednesday, Mr Benn said that in the wake of the court judgment, the UK government’s job was “to make sure that the legislation is made compatible” with the ECHR.
“At that moment, there is no basis for the inter-state case any more, it’s a matter for the Irish government as to what they do with it, but it will have no basis and it will not be able to go anywhere because the House of Commons and the other place [the House of Lords] will have remedied the incompatibilities,” he said.
Introducing the debate, Mr Benn said: “There is both a legal necessity and an imperative for us to act, and this remedial order is the first step in that process.”
He said the “attempt” to grant immunity was “a false promise and it protected no one” and “was never commenced … it was never implemented, and while it may remain on the statute book, in practice it does not exist”.
Conservative shadow Northern Secretary Alex Burghart rejected Mr Benn’s suggestion the UK government had been compelled to act because of the court judgment, saying: “There were grounds to appeal [the court decision] and the government chose not to.”
He said his party had “sought to draw a line [under the past], this government is erasing that line and in so doing is dredging up the past in a way that will allow the Troubles to be fought again and again in the courtroom”.
Democratic Unionist Party leader Gavin Robinson said he believed Mr Benn was introducing the remedial order “wrongly”, was “attaching to these issues a level of undue haste” and should have awaited the conclusion of a Supreme Court challenge brought by British army veterans.
Claire Hanna, the Social Democratic and Labour Party leader, said the remedial order “goes some way to restoring the rule of law to legacy processes” and it was now important to get these processes right as “we can’t afford another missed opportunity”.