NI Troubles Bill Barriers Protect Soldiers from Prosecution for Legacy Killings

On October 14, 2025, the British Labour government, led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, put forward in Parliament the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (the “Troubles Bill”). The bill was the Labour Party’s response to its campaign promise to replace and repeal the highly controversial Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act of 2023 (the “Legacy Act”).

Since its introduction, 188 amendments to the bill have been proposed. The intent of these amendments, arguably, is to circumvent the widely criticized Legacy Act immunity provisions that were repealed in January 2026 by Parliament.

The totality of these amendments and the proposed provisions in the Troubles Bill would add shields to protect soldiers who perpetrated unlawful shootings and killings from accountability. The bill will return in the fall session of the House of Commons for debate and passage.

The Legacy Act of 2023

The genesis of this current debate began on May 17, 2022, when the Tory government introduced the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill, the “Legacy Bill” in the House of Commons. The Bill’s aim was to end all civil and criminal legal proceedings launched against former soldiers, and bar any future legal proceedings against soldiers, police, and paramilitary organization members, particularly loyalist  members acting as “agents” of the British military, for any unlawful shootings and killings committed during the Troubles.

The Legacy Bill created the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (the “ICRIR”) to review cases of unlawful shootings and killings; it provided immunity from prosecution and barred civil suits for persons committing unlawful killings and shootings during the Troubles. Immunity was conditioned on the offender providing the ICRIR with incriminating information about their acts. In other words, confess.

The ICRIR would prepare a report that would be given to the families or victims outlining how their loved ones were shot dead. No prosecutions, no accountability, no justice.

Opposition to the Legacy Bill came, loudly and swiftly. In a rare moment, the DUP, Sinn Féin, the UUP, SDLP, and Alliance Party all condemned the bill. The Irish Government condemned the bill, as did all of the mainline churches in the north.

Despite the outcry, on September 18, 2023, the Legacy Bill became the Legacy Act. Since its enactment, criticism of the Legacy Act has remained strong.

As part of its 2024 campaign manifesto, the Labour Party declared that the Legacy Act should be repealed. In January of this year, Parliament repealed the Act’s immunity provisions in response to recent court rulings and political outcry.

The Northern Ireland Troubles Bill of 2025  

Attempting to keep to its commitment to repeal and replace the Legacy Act, the Labour government brought the Troubles Bill forward. Although the  bill addresses the remaining obstacles of the Legacy Act, the bill’s proposed protections for former soldiers, who should stand accountable for their actions, makes the legislation nothing less than a perfunctory bill.

A fact sheet prepared by the Government, describing the text of the Troubles Bill, states that, “within this legislation [there] will be new protections, not included in the previous government’s Legacy Act, that will apply to any veteran who served in Northern Ireland during the Troubles and is asked to engage with a legacy process, ensuring that they are treated with dignity and respect.”

The Troubles Bill New Provisions

The new provisions set out in the Troubles Bill, exclusive of proposed amendments, include protections for former soldiers from repeated investigations of shootings and killings previously investigated; the right of former soldiers to give evidence through remote access so that “no Northern Ireland veteran is forced to travel to Northern Ireland to give evidence”; the right of former soldiers to ”seek anonymity” when giving evidence; granting “elderly” former soldiers exemption from being compelled to appear before the Commission to give evidence, and giving the Commission authority to consider “the health and wellbeing” of elderly soldiers, and if “it would be appropriate for them to give evidence at all”; provides former soldiers the right to be heard before a statutory advisory group, along with their victims and the families of those who were shot and killed; and specifies that “the Commission will be required to take account of wider circumstances surrounding incidents being investigated.”

Notwithstanding these provisions, the Government is proposing a plethora of amendments to enhance the protections for former soldiers, in addition to protections proposed in the Troubles Bill. In a late April parliamentary maneuver, the Tories, along with a cohort of other smaller parties, voted 279 to 176 to push the Troubles Bill through the Commons on a carry-over motion.

The Tories feared that former soldiers would be “dragged before the courts” if the Bill lapsed in the current session. Their fear stemmed from recent court rulings and the repeal of the immunity provisions in January protecting former soldiers from prosecution. The court rulings held that certain immunity provisions under the Legacy Act violated the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR).

The rulings served as the catalyst for the repeal of the immunity provisions in January. Because the Troubles Bill is now “carried-over” to the next session, there is no lapse, and the Government can advance its amendments.

The Troubles Bill is Inequitable

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Hilary Benn, has made no obfuscation about wanting to delay the Troubles Bill. In a written update to the House of Commons in April, Benn stated, “the new safeguards [that] the Bill will put in place for veterans and other former service personnel have also been broadly welcomed. It has been clear, however, that we must do more through the legislation to safeguard our veteran’s community. It is vital that those who served the state, to whom we owe so much and to whom we have a particular duty of care, are able to have confidence in the legislation.”

Benn also informed the Commons that, following multiple conversations with veterans who voiced “concerns” about the Troubles Bill, the British government would go “further” than the protections already specified in the Bill by bringing a “substantial package” of amendments to “safeguard” former soldiers.
[Pic of John Finucane]

Condemnation of the Troubles Bill and its carry-over to the next session has been strong. Amnesty International’s Gráinne Teggart called upon Parliament “to stand firmly with victims and ensure the [British] government’s new Troubles Bill delivers for them. The Bill must end impunity and guarantee effective investigations.”

Sinn Féin MP John Finucane said the delay was “designed to placate the British military lobby” and to undermine the confidence of victims and families who have spent decades fighting for the simple right to truth and justice.”

Recently, Mark Thompson, CEO of Relatives for Justice, penned an article in The Irish News wherein he addressed the inequity of the Troubles Bill and the lopsided impact that the veterans lobby is having on the on the bill in Parliament. He addressed the probability of parliamentary maneuvers and amendments being used to create a “back door immunity” for former soldiers.

Mr. Thompson referenced Professor Bernard Duhaime, a public international law professor at the University of Québec, who stated that protecting people from flawed investigations is one thing, but shielding them from accountability where evidence exists is another – and the [Troubles] Bill must not permit it.

Britian views itself as a bastion of law and justice. Not so. The Northern Ireland Troubles Bill is far from delivering justice to the victims and the families whose loved ones were shot dead by British soldiers.

 Justice has been defined as “the principle of fairness, moral rightness, and the equitable treatment of individuals within society, ensuring that people receive what they are due in terms of rights, responsibilities, and consequences.” Until the British government embraces justice for the victims and the families, no amount of rhetorical repackaging will disguise the fundamental injustice inflicted upon them.