OMAGH BROADCAST WAS JUSTIFIED
Omagh broadcast was justified
PANORAMA DECISION: BBC's programme on the bombing was in public interest
Both the BBC and the High Court are to be commended for taking the correct decision in the case of the Panorama programme, "Who bombed Omagh?" Two years after the worst atrocity of the Troubles, police have built up a clear picture of what happened and yet there are four individuals, living in the Republic, who have failed to answer questions about their movements and about calls made on mobile phones on the day 29 people were killed.
Viewers could see the way they avoided being questioned by Panorama reporter John Ware. One drove off, others hid or refused to open their doors. They were acting within then-rights but, given the circumstantial evidence about the locations of the phone calls and the seriousness of an explosion that shocked the world, it was a very strange reaction.
Of course, this was not the way that anyone would have wished to conduct the investigation but these were exceptional circumstances. It was a last resort, after police on both sides of the border had accumulated a mountain of intelligence but have been unable to charge more than one person.
With no further arrests pending, the BBC stepped into the breach, in the public interest. In one very professional programme, they succeeded in throwing more light on the circumstances behind the bombing than has been seen for the past two years.
It was a model of investigative journalism, probing but fair, and the only point of controversy was the naming of names. Was this fair to the individuals concerned and would it prejudice any future trial? Even the relatives of the Omagh bomb victims were divided, and the NI Human Rights Commission argued in court that the individuals' rights would be breached.
Mr Justice Kerr ruled that he was not satisfied that there were risks to the named individuals or that there was interference with the presumption of innocence. There is a balance to be drawn between the rights of the suspect and the broadcaster, and Mr Justice Kerr decided that it fell firmly in favour of the BBC.
The interests of the public, which are not only to apprehend the culprits but to make sure that similar bomb attacks are prevented, have been well served. Pressure has been applied and, hopefully, some consciences have been pricked. The broadcasters have done their duty, with the assistance of the police, and those who can put the finger on the culprits must respond. Not till someone stands trial for murder will many of the wounds begin to heal.
PANORAMA DECISION: BBC's programme on the bombing was in public interest
Both the BBC and the High Court are to be commended for taking the correct decision in the case of the Panorama programme, "Who bombed Omagh?" Two years after the worst atrocity of the Troubles, police have built up a clear picture of what happened and yet there are four individuals, living in the Republic, who have failed to answer questions about their movements and about calls made on mobile phones on the day 29 people were killed.
Viewers could see the way they avoided being questioned by Panorama reporter John Ware. One drove off, others hid or refused to open their doors. They were acting within then-rights but, given the circumstantial evidence about the locations of the phone calls and the seriousness of an explosion that shocked the world, it was a very strange reaction.
Of course, this was not the way that anyone would have wished to conduct the investigation but these were exceptional circumstances. It was a last resort, after police on both sides of the border had accumulated a mountain of intelligence but have been unable to charge more than one person.
With no further arrests pending, the BBC stepped into the breach, in the public interest. In one very professional programme, they succeeded in throwing more light on the circumstances behind the bombing than has been seen for the past two years.
It was a model of investigative journalism, probing but fair, and the only point of controversy was the naming of names. Was this fair to the individuals concerned and would it prejudice any future trial? Even the relatives of the Omagh bomb victims were divided, and the NI Human Rights Commission argued in court that the individuals' rights would be breached.
Mr Justice Kerr ruled that he was not satisfied that there were risks to the named individuals or that there was interference with the presumption of innocence. There is a balance to be drawn between the rights of the suspect and the broadcaster, and Mr Justice Kerr decided that it fell firmly in favour of the BBC.
The interests of the public, which are not only to apprehend the culprits but to make sure that similar bomb attacks are prevented, have been well served. Pressure has been applied and, hopefully, some consciences have been pricked. The broadcasters have done their duty, with the assistance of the police, and those who can put the finger on the culprits must respond. Not till someone stands trial for murder will many of the wounds begin to heal.
Further Information
Publisher: BELFAST TELEGRAPH
Ref: BT/0609
Published Date: 10-Oct-00
Related Images
There have been no images archived for this article.