PUBLICATION of Lord Gifford's report on informers should be highlight the absence of justice in the 6 counties and the irreformability of the state which inevitably throws up mechanisms.
The report — Supergrass, The Use of Accomplice Evidence in Northern Ireland was commissioned by the Cobden Trust. It claims that in the last analysis it is the judiciary who are responsible.
The system is guaranteed by judges turning blind eye to obvious abuses, just as they did in the 70's over Castlereagh. policy decision to adopt the informer tactic had been made by the RUC with political agreement at a ministerial level.
Jim Allister, DUP Chief Whip said Gifford's report relied on 'tittle-tattle' relayed to him by 'discredited terrorists'. It is true that in actually going to interview defendants, their lawyers and relatives Gifford broke with a certain status quo in the eyes of the loyalists who regard any such 'dabious elements' with suspicion.
Asked by journalists tow he could rely on the ase of men like Robert Lean — the informer who escaped from RUC custody to a Sinn Fein called press conference to denounce system and expose the ducements made to him — Gifford calmly replied he could see their point.
'But did they not see' he continued 'that it was evidence like this that has convicted 86 people in four supergrass trials in the past year and holds 200 people in custody awaiting trial'.
He added mischievously that he personally would not support the prosecution of any police officer for conspiracy to pervert the justice based on the uncorroborated testimony of a supergrass. Recommendations coming out of the report include — legislation making corroboration of accomplice evidence compulsory; the end of immunity deals offered to grasses; a maximum of ten defendants in any one trial, in the "Black trial, 35 were convicted.
In particular, Gifford focussed on the need to return to jury trials.
Diplock courts had been prejudicial in supergrass trials especially since the circumvention of pre-trial hearings — an unnecessary delay for the conveyorbelt-type legal system preferred.
Informers are not the 'converted terrorists' that the RUC claim. Men like Robert Lean are held against their will, bullied, and bribed into signing statements drawn up by the RUC against people they have never heard of.
used by Labour to such self-protective NCCL-sponsored continuation of the 'supergrass' alleged torture in Gifford also suggests that a the supergrass intimidation incourse of He said that the no-jury THE TORIES' PLAN to abolish the Greater London Council and other Metropolitan Councils is very unpopular. It is rightly seen as an attack on local democracy and a political manoeuvre to avoid trying to vote the Labour authorities out of office. Another aspect democracy is the planned 'rate-capping' bill to stop councils putting up the rates above a certain level. However this piece of legislation looks like being a lot more popular. And that in a nutshell sums up a big problem of strategy and tactics for the Labour Left.
In recent years Thatcher has made it increasingly councils (usually Labourcontrolca even their present inadequate services. let alone to finance any expansion or improvements. Government subs oes mave eet cut and harsh penalties introduced wherebv councils lose up to f2 or £3 of grant for everv t they spend over central government's ceiling for expenditure.
This is all part of a cynical drive by the Tories to run down council services and lower working class living standards.
Debate has raged inside the Labour Party on how to respond to this.
have been dreamed up to get around the problen Creative accounting', clever cost-cutting oeuvres, David Blunkett's plan to force the DHSS to pay higher rents for the unemployed Sheffield council tenants have all been investigated.
(Islington South CLP)
Others have toyed with the idea of mass resigna. tions by Councillors, but all too often the councils have fallen back on the easy option of putting up the rates. The result is that the rates have recently spiralled upwards way ahead of inflation • IT many Labour-controlled boroughs.
While it's true that rate rises hit working class people less rent rises, and that much of the rates fall on larger business government offices, nevertheless big rate increases are an attack on working class living standards. And they are rightly unpopular with working people small businesses as a result.
Rate rises discredit the Labour councils who imThatcher's attack on local plement them people see them as "just the same as the rest' attacking living standards. They also pro viae an casy locus for op position to the progressive Lucasuits LaK CL U' SUllIC Labour councils to finance 'unpopular' causes such as black, wömen gay community projects. Half sne outcry about these measures comes basic racial and sexist prejedices, but the other half comes from people feeling that is the reason why their Tate. dic shooting up which it isn't.
Penalties This year local Labour councils parties again faced with what to do about even bigger penalties and the threat that by next year the rate rise loophole will have been shut by the Tories through the planned rate. capping law. Unfortunatethe response of most cluding many socialists on the left, is to sale, trous so his year, 'let's somehow mudprepare for a huge battle with the Tories next year over rate-capping'. The argument goes that we neve to Conserve energy this year for next year's 'final showdown' The problem that they are walking straight into the trap the Tories nave carefully laid them.
Because after a few years of big rate increases inflicted on them, local working people even on the estates where Labour's vote is strongest, will not take kindly to another big rise UnIs veal wine 'final showdown' is prepared. Another round of rate rises will be just the ticket for the Tories and completely undermine the chances of a mass campaign against 'ratecapping'.
Who Will get thusiastic over a campaign to defend the right of local councils to keep putting the rates up?
to this trap, but it isn't easy. it's been made more difficult by the practice of Labour councils in recent years in putting up the rates rather than taking on the government. Such an alternative would mean a massive and thorough propaganda campaign in conjunction with the unions towards the local community to explain that tne Tories have stolen the local services, causing improvements to be scrapped and services to deteriorate.
It would mean linking with other councils across the country and national unions ir dinated protest campaign culminating in the refusal to cut services and a confrontation as the Tories try LE C .commissioners to make the cuts.
Support
Only a protest move. ment with massive support rooted in the unions and the communities force the government to back coff some say unal such d confrontationist approach would not guarantee vic But slow death through Dosing wuse in working class support AUEW Council workers in Bury fight privatisation and cuts in services 1 THINK THE PROBLEM 3 BASICALLY ARISES FROM A LINGUISTIC/SEMANTIC CONFUSION - OR TC § PUT IT IN TERMS THAT EVEN A JUMPED-UP rate rises is a guarantee of defeat.
Already • Liverpool council have begun down the road of confrontation will une lones. some On the left have criticised them for 'going it alone'. But the responsibility for them stallull. alone lies with those other Labour councils and parties who have failed to give a similar fighting lead Or collaborate with Liverpool to form a national campaign. If Liverpool is left to fight alone and is defeated by Thatcher the right wing i the Labour Party will use its defeat to discredit any idea of confronting the Tories' attacks on local government financing WHEN CONTEMPLATINC ETERNAL VERITIES...
...WHO COULD CARE A TOSS ABOUT A FEW DEAD PADDIES?!?
----- pull-quotes -----
N BINS For nalgo OFFICIAL PICKET
nolg OFFICI PICK BORING