The Public Inquiry into Sean Brown’s Murder Must Move Forward
By Judge Michael Mentel
On May 12, 1997, an impromptu match was played at the Bellaghy Wolfe Tones GAA (Gaelic Athletic Association) Club grounds in South Derry, just outside of Bellaghy. The match was played at the time when the weekly GAA Club meeting normally took place. As a result of the match, the meeting was pushed back to that evening, ending at 11:15 p.m.
Following the meeting, Club Chairman Sean Brown waited until the last meeting attendees left the grounds. He then drove his vehicle to the main gates of the Club immediately off Ballyscullion Road to lock the gates for the night. At approximately 11:32 p.m. members of the Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF) pulled several cars into the gate area, exited the cars, and attacked Mr. Brown, brutally beating him.
Mr. Brown was thrown into the trunk of his own car, which was then driven by the LVF to a secluded area ten miles outside of Bellaghy. Once there, he was dragged from the trunk, thrown down next to his car, and shot six times in the head. The LVF then set fire to the car. The heat from the flames was so extreme that it burned a portion of his body. That was 28 years ago.
Twenty-eight years on, no one has been charged or prosecuted for his murder.
Chairman of the GAA
Sean Brown was 61 years old when he was murdered. He is survived by his 87-year-old widow, Bridie Brown. Mr. Brown was father to six children; regrettably, one passed away four years ago.
Mr. Brown was not engaged in politics, nor was he involved with any paramilitary organizations. He was held in high esteem in his community and across Ireland. His dedication and support of the GAA was unquestionable.
His murder has been described as “an arrow through Ireland’s heart.” In 2024, the Coroners Court for Northern Ireland found, “[Sean Brown] was a man who was at the heart of his family and his community. He was a man of whom his family are justifiably proud. He was the kind of person our society needs, and his loss is truly felt in that wider sense.”
That year, a public inquiry was ordered by the High Court in Belfast into Mr. Brown’s murder, however, the British government appealed that ruling to stop the inquiry from moving forward.
British Appeal Brown Public Inquiry Ruling
The legal path to the public inquiry into Sean Brown’s murder has taken many turns. Public inquiries are prescribed under The Public Inquiries Act of 2005 (the “Act”). The Act provides that a British government Minister may cause an inquiry to be held if it appears that “particular events have caused … public concern, or … there is a public concern that particular events may have occurred.”
On February 27, 2024, the Legacy Inquest Unit released a Gist of the Sean Brown Inquest. A “Gist” under Northern Ireland law identifies the essential grounds or object of a legal action without which no cause for action would exist.
The Gist issued by the Legacy Inquest Unit stated that “[t]he material [provided in the case] indicates that more than 25 individuals were linked, through intelligence, to the murder of Sean Brown. The intelligence material [further] indicates that those individuals are said to have been involved, at the material time, with loyalist paramilitaries.” It further stated that “… intelligence material [from the British government] indicates that at the time of the death of Sean Brown, a number of individuals linked through intelligence to the murder were agents of the [British government].”
In March 2024, the Coroner Court Justice, Mr. Justice Kinney, determined that “[he was] satisfied that [his] duty to carry out a full, fair and fearless investigation into Mr. Brown’s death is seriously compromised as issues of central importance to the death cannot be dealt with by the inquest process.”
He determined that “[he could not] investigate or make a proper analysis of material which is the subject of the PII [public interest immunity] certificates.” In other words, the British government was blocking the coroner from investigating the murder by claiming PII.
In December 2024, the Belfast High Court of Justice handed down a ruling advancing the public inquiry into the murder. The Court adopted several key findings from the Gist. It subsequently issued “… an order of mandamus compelling the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to cause a public inquiry to be held, under the Inquiries Act 2005, into the death of Sean Brown on 12 May 1997.” An appeal of the court’s order by the British government soon followed.
British Government Appeals High Court Decision
The British government asserts two issues in its appeal. The first contention asserts that it is exempt from disclosing information under public interest immunity, PII, allowing it to bar the release of otherwise disclosable information. The second contention asserts that the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (the “ICRIR”) exists to conduct the inquiry in lieu of a public inquiry under the Inquiry Act.
The ICRIR is a body established under the Legacy Act of 2023 and intended to provide families with answers to the tragedies suffered during the Troubles while giving immunity to government perpetrators. The Court of Appeals Belfast has ruled part of the Legacy Act to be unlawful while allowing the ICRIR to continue. The Government is allegedly in the process of repealing and replacing the Legacy Act, however it intends to contest the Court of Appeals ruling relating to the Secretary of State’s unilateral authority to withhold sensitive information.
The fundamental problem to advancing a public inquiry is the British Secretary of State’s unilateral authority to determine what sensitive information will and will not be disclosed. In this case, the Secretary of State asserts that he, not the courts, has sole authority to determine what information is held back on the Government’s involvement in the Brown murder.
On January 16th of this year, the British government argued its appeal before the Court of Appeals Belfast. It contended that it holds unilateral authority to determine if a public inquiry should move forward. Des Fahy KC, representing the Brown family, argued that the “illegality at the centre [sic] of this challenge [is the] refusal by the Secretary of State to convene a public inquiry…In refusing to do so, he is presiding over a state of illegality.”
Barrister Fahy informed the Court that, “Sean Brown’s widow appears in court today for the 57th time to ask a court to ensure that the state adheres to its minimum obligation to ensure an effective investigation of how her husband died and in what circumstances.” Fahy noted to the Court that “[t]he killers have in all likelihood escaped accountability for their actions, but the reasons why that was, and is, still can, and must, be examined.”
A maxim of law posits that justice delayed is justice denied.
Twenty-eight years and fifty-seven court appearances later, justice has clearly been delayed. It now rests with the Court of Appeals Belfast to ensure that justice is not denied to the Brown family.
