A former British soldier accused of murdering innocent civilians in Ireland in January 1972 will go on trial in mid-September. You’re probably going to hear a lot about the trial of ‘Soldier F’. You’ll also hear about the legacy of the conflict known as The Troubles when that trial starts. You can read some our past articles on the conflict here.

It’s important to understand some details about what went on that day in the city of Derry and what’s gone on since. Bloody Sunday is a very emotive topic in Ireland and the UK. The massacre echoes through time and has helped shaped the Irish nationalist/Republican response to current events. For example, Bloody Sunday remembrance in 2024 was dedicated to Gaza. Bloody Sunday’s legal aftermath is also subject to a lot of disinformation and misinformation, especially among British military Ireland veterans. This article might help clarify some facts.

Bloody Sunday

On 30 January 1972, a civil rights march took place in the city of Derry, in the North of Ireland. Those present were protesting the British policy of internment (imprisonment) without trial. The civil rights movement in Ireland was modeled on the civil rights movement in the US. It involved people from across the sectarian divide and used peaceful protest tactics.

Also present that day were the 1st Battalion of the British Parachute regiment, known as 1 Para. During the protest the Paras attacked the protestors, killing 13 people outright (another died later). Many more were wounded.

1 Para had previous form when it came to killing civilians. Only months earlier in Ballymurphy, west Belfast, the same army unit had carried out separate atrocity. The British Army had killed 10 people including a priest and a mother of eight children. One victim was himself a former soldier. In both cases, it took many years of campaigning by families and lawyers for something like the truth to emerge

It took until 2021 for a coroner’s report to find the Ballymurphy killings were “without justification”. The first inquiry into Bloody Sunday, the Widgery Tribunal, has been heavily criticised. The judge in charge, Lord Chief Justice Widgery, effectively exonerated the soldiers and even claimed that they had been fired upon first.

Unjustifiable

The second inquiry, called the Saville Inquiry, led to an apology in 2010 by then UK Prime Minister David Cameron. He said that the events of Bloody Sunday were “unjustified and unjustifiable”:

The conclusions of this report are absolutely clear. There is no doubt, there is nothing equivocal, there are no ambiguities. What happened on Bloody Sunday was both unjustified and unjustifiable. It was wrong.

The Saville report itself was equally clear (our bold):

The firing by soldiers of 1 PARA on Bloody Sunday caused the deaths of 13 people and injury to a similar number, none of whom was posing a threat of causing death or serious
injury.

Strengthened the IRA

The report found that the killings actually helped of Republican paramilitaries recruit and increased violence:

What happened on Bloody Sunday strengthened the Provisional IRA, increased nationalist resentment and hostility towards the Army and exacerbated the violent conflict of the years that followed. Bloody Sunday was a tragedy for the bereaved and the wounded, and a catastrophe for the people of Northern Ireland.

In short, the massacre communicated to many nationalists that peaceful protest would not work. As a direct result, many turned to armed struggle. In 2017, the Irish Times reported the testimony of Derry man Tony Doherty who joined the IRA after his father, Patrick, was allegedly killed by Soldier F that day:

The Saville Report found that he had been shot and mortally wounded as he tried to crawl to safety. There was “no doubt”, Lord Saville wrote, that Soldier F shot Patrick Doherty. He had fired “either in the belief that no-one in the area…was posing a threat, or not caring.

Huge influx into the IRA

The same Irish Times report added:

It marked the effective end of the civil rights movement and led to a huge influx into the ranks of the IRA.

Doherty said:

It changed the discourse even among children in that we started talking about murder.

It was all about how you oppose the Brits, it was all about rioting, and even though we could only throw small stones with small hands. that’s what you did.

Many victims and relatives felt the Saville findings didn’t go far enough. Yet the conclusions from the 12 year, £195bn investigation are very clear on who was to blame.

Soldier F

One of the paratrooper present on Bloody Sunday goes by the title Soldier F. Now an old man, Soldier F is alleged to have murdered two civilians and attempted to murder five more.

He is known as Soldier F because a court injunction has been put in place to protect his identity. The solicitor of one family affected by Bloody Sunday says this move is “a very, very serious departure from accepted norms and principles of open justice”. A judge has previously ruled that the injunction will remain in force due to fears over violence from dissident Republicans.

An interesting footnote of the Soldier F story involves right-wing journalist Douglas Murray. Murray, a hard-right culture warrior widely known for his support for the state of Israel. Murray followed the Saville Inquiry closely and produced a well-regarded book on Bloody Sunday.

Writing in the Spectator in January 2021, Murray said he believed “with certainty” that the Bloody Sunday shooters “include not only unapologetic killers, but unrelenting liars”:

As one soldier after another appeared before Lord Saville, it became clear that the soldiers of 1 Para were intent on spurning this last effort to get to the truth of what happened that day.

Almost without exception they stonewalled, sticking to the testimony they had given in 1972, repeating claims that had been repeatedly disproven and, when in difficulty, pleading forgetfulness. Not a plausible forgetfulness, but a highly selective, implausible type. Their evidence was evasive, frustrating and self-damning.

Kill with impunity

Murray’s article concludes:

Perhaps on that disastrous day in 1972 he thought he was teaching the citizens of Londonderry [Derry] some kind of lesson. Or perhaps — under what he presumed to be suitable cover — he just seized an opportunity to kill with impunity on British streets.

It is true that few people are comfortable with retired soldiers being prosecuted. But if soldier F did indeed presume he could get away with murder that day, who is comfortable with that presumption proving right?

The trail is set to start at Belfast Crown court on 15 September.

The spectre of war

For many years, legacy allegations from Britain’s wars have caused fear and anger in the UK veterans community. A similar process has developed around allegations over Iraq and Afghanistan. In both cases, the British state passed laws to make prosecutions more difficult.

These laws were called the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 and the Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Act 2021.

There is an important political dimension. It has become common in the culture wars for ex-military personnel, right-wing journalists and politicians to claim that there is a witch-hunt of British veterans and service personnel. The answer to the question of who doing this witch hunting varies. Sometimes it is “left-wing” lawyers. At other times it is Republicans or money-grubbing Iraq or Afghan families.

For the Centre for Military Justice (CMJ), which often represents veterans against the British government, the claim that veterans are being witch-hunted over Ireland is very weak.

“There is no witch hunt”

Emma Norton is a prominent lawyer who specialises in big military cases. She works for the Centre for Military Justice (CMJ). In July, the CMJ addressed widespread disinformation and misinformation about legacy allegations:

As was the case during the passage of the despised Legacy Act, this debate is clouded by myths and ignorance about both the conflict and what has happened in the years since the Good Friday Agreement.

The CMJ said that the Northern Ireland Act didn’t just hinder Irish civilian victims of Troubles-era violence. It also stopped many military veterans and military families from getting justice:

Those purporting to act in the interests of veterans have, so far, had absolutely nothing to say about the shutting down of investigations into the maiming and murder of hundreds of service personnel when the Legacy Act was passed.

CMJ also addressed the claim that veterans were being “witchhunted” (our bold):

There have been just six prosecutions brought against veterans since the Good Friday Agreement, more than 25 years ago. There has been just ONE conviction. That is not a witch-hunt.

Soldier F: only one conviction

Emma Norton said political actors must stop “stoking the fears of the veteran community”. She said it was “irresponsible to encourage veterans to live in perpetual fear of getting a knock at the door and activists should not be pouring fuel on the fire of elderly men’s fears”.

She explained:

There has been a single conviction of a veteran since the Good Friday Agreement – this is no witch-hunt. Those that served in the extremely difficult environment of NI during Operation Banner and who acted reasonably and within the law and rules of engagement as they genuinely understood them to be, have nothing to fear.

This protest is presented as in the interests of the armed forces but is nothing of the sort. All it does is create the impression that the armed forces consider themselves to be above the law. This is fundamentally inconsistent with everything we know about the service personnel we support who expect and are entitled to be both bound by and protected by the law.

War crimes immunity

The trial comes as Labour is starting to repeal the Troubles Legacy Act. We wrote extensively on the act before ait came into effect.

On 4 December 2024, Northern Ireland minister Hilary Benn announced he was beginning the process of repealing the act. This would mean the law is removed. Repealing the law had been a Labour manifesto pledge. A court ruling in Belfast in January 2024 had already decided the act, which included an amnesty over Troubles era offences, breached human rights law.

Benn said:

The steps I am outlining today seek to correct the mistakes of the previous government’s approach, ensure compliance with the ECHR and deliver on what this government has promised.

The removal of conditional immunity, the reinstatement of legacy inquests halted by the act, restoring civil cases and reforming ICRIR (Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery, while enabling it to continue working on behalf of the growing number of families who have already sought its help.

Campaigns for justice – not least with Soldier F

It isn’t clear what will happen in the Soldier F trial next month. It is set to begin at Belfast Crown Court on 15 September. But we do know that the story of Troubles legacy allegations has been shaped by massive misinformation and disinformation. Bad-faith actors have created a fake narrative of older veterans being witch hunted. Experts and commentators from across the political spectrum have been very critical of many aspects of the cases, the inquiries and the discourse around them.

And this takes place against the backdrop of British complicity in Gaza. There are important lessons in the story of Bloody Sunday, and of the Troubles, which we should consider when we think about how long, partial and riddled with confusion and deception campaigns for justice against powerful states and institutions can be.

Featured image via the Canary

By Joe Glenton

This post was originally published on Canary.