Law, secrecy and the ‘smothering blanket’ of national security: how (not) to acknowledge past wrongs

Drawing from the interdisciplinary literature on secrecy, colonialism and post-colonialism this paper examines the ways in which national security has been deployed regarding past wrongs by the British state in Northern Ireland. The first part of the paper traces the intersection between national security related discourses and the complex relationship between Britain and Northern Ireland including devolution and the long history of political violence. The second part of the paper traces the role of the "national security veto" in efforts to address the legacy of the conflict including through: investigations into conflict related events mandated by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR); three overarching political efforts to address the legacy of the conflict; and a series of legal contests in the United Kingdom (UK) domestic courts including the now leading Thompson judgement. The paper argues national security discourses reflect a "quasi-colonial" approach to the control of information by the metropolis and distrust of the local, as well as a determination to deny or obfuscate unlawful or embarrassing details about past state actions during the "dirty war". The authors conclude that unless efforts to address the past include a genuine openness to acknowledge past wrongs, and the political will to override the nation security reflex towards secrecy, victims’ efforts to secure truth and justice about the worst aspects of the dirty war may continue be thwarted.