The Government should formally oppose UK proposals that would hand the Attorney General for England and Wales a veto over Troubles-related prosecutions, the Oireachtas Committee on Justice has concluded. The committee's report, published on 5 November 2026 following pre-legislative scrutiny of the Government's own legacy legislation, will be sent to Minister for Justice Jim O'Callaghan.
According to RTE.ie, the committee also recommends that the interstate case Ireland has taken against the British government at the European Court of Human Rights be maintained until every concern around legacy inquests is resolved. The report's foreword, written by committee chairman and Sinn Féin TD Matt Carthy, welcomes co-operation with legacy mechanisms while raising what it calls serious concerns about the amended Bill now before the UK House of Lords.
A political appointee with power over prosecutions
The amended Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, sent forward to the Lords two weeks ago, would require the consent of the Attorney General for England and Wales before Troubles-related prosecutions could proceed. That office is a political appointment, which is precisely why the committee sees a problem: prosecutorial independence would rest in the hands of a British political figure rather than in the law.
The committee's report states that concern arises from proposed amendments that would give the British Attorney General a decisive role in legacy prosecutions, raising questions about the independence of prosecutorial decision-making, as the Irish Independent also reported. There is a separate Attorney General for Northern Ireland, appointed by the First Minister and deputy First Minister under devolution, but the consent power would sit with the London appointee.
For families who have spent decades waiting for the truth about loved ones killed during the conflict, this is not a technicality. It is the difference between a legal process and a political one.
Impunity for British soldiers, questions from the chair
Carthy's foreword goes further than the Attorney General issue. He questions the procedural protections extended to UK security personnel, and he insists that the Oireachtas must be satisfied that any legislation enabling co-operation does not undermine accountability or weaken the principles underpinning the Good Friday Agreement.
The foreword describes it as essential that no system is created that affords preferential treatment, or a degree of impunity, to former members of the British Armed Forces. That word, impunity, carries weight from a committee chairman whose party has long argued that the UK's legacy approach shields state actors from the consequences of their actions.
What the Government's own legislation is meant to do
The Government's bill under scrutiny is designed to allow Irish authorities to co-operate with UK public inquiries and with the investigative Legacy Commission once it is established. It would also create a joint cross-border Independent Commission on Information Retrieval, a body intended to help families find answers about deaths during the Troubles without the delays that have defined the process so far.
The committee accepts the value of that co-operation. Its objections are about the safeguards around it.
Who should decide when information is withheld?
Among the recommendations, the committee says the legislation must clearly define what is meant by national security, sovereignty and other essential interests of the State when those grounds are cited to withhold information. National security restrictions, the minister will be told, should not be relied upon to conceal wrongdoing or State involvement in serious human rights violations.
Decisions to withhold information should be made by an independent judge rather than a minister, the committee believes. It also seeks independent judicial oversight of redactions of information and of any restrictions on witness questioning. These are the checks that turn an information recovery process into something a family can actually trust.
A new independent unit for unresolved cases
The committee recommends the establishment of an independent unit to investigate unresolved Troubles-related cases, and it says any legacy investigative mechanism should be institutionally independent from An Garda Síochána. The report, seen by The Independent's Dublin correspondent, also calls for stronger statutory obligations on state bodies and on current and former office holders to co-operate with investigations and information-recovery processes.
Statutory obligations matter here. Voluntary co-operation has too often meant selective co-operation, with files delayed, redacted or simply never produced. Placing the duty in law would put the burden where it belongs, on the institutions that hold the records.
Legacy inquests must survive the Commission
Another recommendation urges the Government to oppose any UK amendment that would remove provision for legacy inquests after the Legacy Commission is wound up. Inquests have been one of the few routes through which families secured findings of state involvement in killings, including cases where British state forces were found responsible. Closing that route would leave families with fewer avenues than at any point since the Good Friday Agreement.
The interstate case Ireland lodged against the UK's legacy approach remains, in the committee's view, one of the few levers of real pressure available to the State. Maintaining it until the inquest concerns are addressed keeps the question of accountability within the framework of the European Convention on Human Rights, where it belongs.
What happens next
The report and its recommendations now go to Minister O'Callaghan, who must decide how the Government's legislation is framed before it returns to the Oireachtas. The committee's findings give him a clear mandate: co-operate where co-operation helps families, but draw hard lines around judicial independence, transparency and the principle that no one, including former British soldiers, stands above the law.
Frequently asked questions
What does the Oireachtas committee want the Government to oppose?
The committee wants the Government to formally oppose proposals requiring the Attorney General for England and Wales, a political appointee, to give consent for Troubles-related prosecutions, and to oppose any amendment removing legacy inquests after the Legacy Commission is wound up.
Who chairs the Oireachtas Committee on Justice?
Sinn Féin TD Matt Carthy chairs the committee and wrote the foreword to its report, published on 5 November 2026.
What happens to the interstate case against the UK?
The committee recommends that the Irish Government maintain its interstate case against the British government until all concerns around legacy inquests are addressed.
Who should decide on withholding sensitive information, according to the report?
The committee says decisions to withhold information on national security grounds should be made by an independent judge rather than a minister, with independent judicial oversight of redactions and restrictions on witness questioning.