John Hunter Column: Irish arms trial offers unionists a smoking gun

WHEN the current Bloody Sunday inquiry was proposed a few years ago, the predictable unionist response was that it would be a costly, useless exercise.

And why wasn't there an inquiry into the Irish Government's involvement in the Dublin Arms Trial case of 1970, now widely seen as directly connected with the foundation of the Provos?

At the time, the nationalist reaction to the Bloody Sunday- objecting unionists was that they were simply playing tit-for-tat politics, much the same as many in the same camp view the current funding of the Ulster-Scots dialect as nothing more than a placatory sop to balance official encouragement of the Irish language.

For years, however, there's been a widely held view, north and south, that the full truth behind Irish Government attempts to import weapons for use by nationalists in the sectarian upsurge after 1969 had never emerged.

And this despite two trials, which ended in the seemingly mysterious acquittal of the defendants and a largely inconclusive Dail inquiry.

For nationalists, outrage that individuals were charged at all was placated only by the fact that they were all acquitted.

For unionists, the relief was that under the apparently determined hand of Jack Lynch, the then Fianna Fail Taoiseach, gun-running attempts involving Cabinet ministers were nipped in the bud, once he realised what was going on.

Now secret state-documents are telling a different story.

It seems that several now-dead Fianna Fail ministers of the day were either directly involved in, or knew of, the plans to import arms long before the matter came to a head with the sacking of Charles Haughey and Neil Blaney, both of whom were later charged.

The case against Neil Blaney was dismissed for lack of evidence and, after two trials, the others, who included Haughey, former Irish Army captain James Kelly and the current Sinn Fein Assemblyman John Kelly, were found not guilty.

The court, incredibly as it seemed at the time, found that they had been acting in accord with an officially-approved plan to import the weapons.

In fact, the Minister of Defence, Jim Gibbons, was called as a prosecution witness.

His blustering testimony played a major part in the defendants' acquittal.

Charles Haughey insisted that he knew nothing of the weapons plan; he was lying, but both the Kellys openly stated that they had acted in accord with state policy.

Now, however, original testimony by the then head of Irish Military Intelligence, Colonel Michael Hefferon, the direct superior of Captain Kelly, insists that Jim Gibbons knew of the arms plan all along, despite his denials.

But extracts from this document, which incriminated Gibbons, were officially removed before it was submitted to court.

Further, it is now insisted that Taoiseach Jack Lynch was told by a senior civil servant of the weapons plan some six months before he finally sacked his ministers.

The implications of all this in the Republic are enormous, but, curiously, little has been made of the matter north of the border to date.

As the issue stands, Honest Jack Lynch put an end to 1970 attempts by his ministers to supply weapons to the northern defence groups which became the Provos.

But why did he do it and how long did he take to move?

Ironically, it looks like among the few telling the truth were both the Kellys. That shouldn't deter unionist questions.

Copyright 2001 MGN LTD
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved.