Skip to main content

Human Rights Watch released a letter (see below) calling on Northern Ireland's Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to explain publicly the recent decision not to prosecute the police officers accused of David Adams' assault in February 1994.

"Unlike many cases of police abuse that are settled out of court, there is a detailed public record of egregious police conduct in the Adams case," said Julia Hall, counsel in the Europe and Central Asia Division of Human Rights Watch. "Despite the court's finding that RUC officers inflicted severe injuries on David Adams -- and lied about it under oath -- these officers will now enjoy impunity for what amounts to torture."

The letter urges the DPP to make public the criminal investigation report submitted by Assistant Chief Constable of Strathclyde, James Orr, under the supervision of the Independent Commission on Police Complaints, and the opinion of a senior counsel solicited by the DPP, which reportedly supports the decision not to prosecute.

For more information, please contact:
Julia Hall (716) 803 1127
Alex Frangos (212) 216 1844

The text of the letter is below:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

August 10, 1999

Alisdair Fraser
Director of Public Prosecutions
Royal Courts of Justice
Chichester Street
Belfast BT1 3NX
Northern Ireland

By fax: 011.44.1232.546146

Dear Mr. Fraser:

Human Rights Watch is writing to express grave concern about your recent decision not to order prosecutions of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) officers accused of assaulting David Adams during his arrest and in Castlereagh Holding Centre in February 1994.

Given the February 1998 civil case judgment against the RUC, which unequivocally found in favor of Mr. Adams and stated that the medical evidence incontrovertibly supported his claims of assault, we call on you to state publicly your justification for declining to prosecute the accused officers. We also urge you to release publicly the reports that we assume you used as the basis for your decision, namely the report of the Independent Commission for Police Complaints (ICPC) criminal investigation supervised by Assistant Chief Constable of Strathclyde James Orr and the opinion you solicited from an independent senior counsel that reportedly supports your decision not to prosecute.

As you are well aware, David Adams was awarded the highest payment of exemplary damages ever ordered against the RUC. The injuries he suffered in the aftermath of his arrest included a punctured lung, broken ribs, and a broken leg—which Adams claimed he suffered after the officers took running, martial arts-style kicks at him in Castlereagh. The accused police officers either claimed that they did not inflict these injuries on Adams or that any physical contact with him was due to the fact that he "struggled" with the officers. The judgment in the civil court action, however, rendered by Mr. Justice Kerr, stated that "not only are the injuries consistent with the plaintiff's [Mr. Adams'] account but they cannot be explained if the police account is accepted." Mr. Justice Kerr went on to conclude that he had "substantial reservations about the truth and accuracy of the evidence of police officers at the scene" and that "the plaintiff was assaulted in Castlereagh in the manner alleged by him." On the strength of evidence submitted by a couple at the scene of the arrest, which recounted that the accused police officers called Adams "a Fenian bastard" and one officer shouted, "I hope he chokes on his own blood," Mr. Justice Kerr also concluded that Adams "was subjected to sectarian abuse." Indeed, the court ruled that "all of the principal injuries suffered by the plaintiff were the result of assaults by police officers and that these were not occasioned or contributed to by resistance on his part." The court awarded Adams £30,000 in damages.

The Adams case is unique because the civil action was not settled out of court. Thus, there is a complete record of testimony and evidence publicly available that details the assault upon Adams. Moreover, there is an unequivocal judgment finding the presentation of evidence by the accused RUC officers "untruthful" and the RUC liable for Adams' injuries. Such public findings have been virtually unheard of in the past as the RUC has routinely claimed exemption from court proceedings—and having its officers testify in court—by requesting a Public Interest Immunity Certificate (PIIC). The issuance of PIICs has denied the public a full accounting of alleged police abuse in hundreds of cases. In the Adams case, however, no such immunity for police officers in "the public interest" was claimed. Thus, it is all the more extraordinary that, despite the civil judgment meticulously detailing the abuse Adams suffered and finding that RUC officers perjured themselves before the court, no prosecutions have been ordered. It is of grave concern that the RUC officers have won effective immunity from prosecution for conduct amounting to torture and that they remain on active duty in the RUC in positions in which they may have other detainees in their care.

In the aftermath of the civil judgment, RUC Chief Constable Ronnie Flanagan drafted Assistant Chief Constable of Strathclyde James Orr to conduct an independent criminal investigation into Adams' case under the direction of the ICPC. Constable Orr submitted his report to the DPP but that report has not been made public. We urge the DPP to make the ICPC report public in order to allay credible public fear that the DPP decision was taken despite a criminal investigation report containing evidence possibly bolstering the case for criminal prosecutions. After the decision not to prosecute the officers was made, the DPP's office claimed that it solicited an opinion by a senior counsel that eventually supported the DPP's decision. We also urge the DPP to make this opinion available to the public.

Given the unusual public nature of this case and the record of abuse it details, we call on the DPP to offer a public explanation for what appears to be a politically influenced decision not to prosecute the accused officers. Silence on the part of the DPP will only serve to further undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system.

Sincerely,
/s/
Holly Cartner
Executive Director
Europe and Central Asia Division

Your tax deductible gift can help stop human rights violations and save lives around the world.