The UK government has declined to hold a public inquiry into the death of Pat Finucane. Here is a brief thread on why that is significant.

Background - Pat Finucane was a prominent solicitor in Northern Ireland who was murdered in front of his family by paramilitaries in 1989. There have been consistent allegations of collusion between the UK government and the paramilitaries that carried out the murder.

There have been several investigations into the murder, none have discharged the UK’s obligations to investigate the death under the European Convention. John Stevens investigated the death and found evidence of collusion between UK government and paramilitaries in 1990.

Peter Cory, a retired Canadian judge, investigated the allegations of collusion between UK government and paramilitaries in Northern Ireland and concluded in 2003.

A case was taken to the ECtHR which found that the UK had not properly investigated the murder and the UK had violated the obligation to investigate under Article 2 of European Convention on Human Rights - http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-61185 

The Committee of Ministers at the Council of Europe, which supervises implementation of judgments, closed the examination of the Finucane case on the basis that a public inquiry would be established. That was in March 2009.

In July 2011 the Cameron government declined to hold a public inquiry into the death of Pat Finucane because

Desmond Da Silva was instructed to review the case and concluded

Da Silva’s investigation lacked the capacity to compel key witnesses to give evidence. This led The UK Supreme Court to rule that that the Da Silva review did not discharge the UK’s obligations under Article 2 concluding

The Supreme Court did not order the creation of a public inquiry, but it was expected that one would be announced because it is difficult to see what other mechanism under the UK system would be capable of discharging the Art 2 obligation.

There is an issue of public trust at stake, there are serious questions over the impartiality of the investigators and doubts over their capacity to discharge Article 2 obligations.

In many cases public inquiries are the only means of discharging an article 2 obligation to investigate, but the power to initiate them lies exclusively with the executive. This needs to change or another mechanism of discharging article 2 obligations needs to be created.