Opinion

Clear that arrest of Adams was a sham

THE arrest, detention and interrogation of Gerry Adams has created a crisis of confidence among republicans.

Urgent action is required by the British and Irish governments to restore that confidence which was a central and vital part of the initiative-taking process by republicans - initiatives which heralded so much change for the better to people's lives here and in Britain.

Gerry Adams's arrest is viewed by republicans as a full-frontal attack on the integrity of the peace process and came at a time when the integrity of the peace process was already being undermined by actions taken by the British government.

We have seen their pandering to the DUP over republicans described as 'on the runs'; the insulting treatment of the relatives of those massacred by the British army in Ballymurphy with the refusal to support an investigation into the massacre; the statement from Theresa Villiers claiming that too much attention is being paid to those killed by the British crown forces, formally and informally through collusion with loyalists, and the failure of both the British and Irish governments to support the efforts by the US diplomat Richard haass to establish a credible process to deal with the past.

It is now quite clear from the accounts given by Gerry Adams after his release that his arrest was, as he described, "a sham". The British and Irish governments have serious questions to answer about it.

For example: if his arrest was not political, why was Theresa Villiers informed on Monday that Gerry Adams would be arrested on Wednesday? We can be sure she told David Cameron who held his garden tea party with the DUP as Gerry Adams was being interrogated. Did Villiers tell the taoiseach given that the Irish government is an equal partner and joint guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement?

Republicans believe that the timing of Gerry Adams's arrest was political because the PSNI has had the Boston tapes since last summer and two months ago Gerry Adams offered to meet the police in relation to the allegations. They waited. They waited until an election campaign was under way so that they could maximise the effect of a dramatic arrest.

But it backfired and there are many who have questions to answer.

It was Lord Bew, former advisor to David Trimble, successor of Sir Patrick Mayhew as president of the Airey Neave Trust, who proposed ed Moloney and Anthony McIntyre as project director and researcher, respectively. It seemed a strange choice, to put it kindly. After the death of Brendan hughes it was Moloney's book, Voices from the

Grave, that alerted the police to the archive. Historian Professor Richard english said about the book: "Far more could have been done to test the claims of Ervine and Hughes against sources reflecting very different perspectives."

Tim Pat Coogan wrote: "Moloney does not indicate that both himself and McIntyre, an ex-IRA prisoner and blanket man, are two of Gerry Adams's most pertinent and relentless critics."

We now know that in a memo the co-founder of Boston College's Irish studies programme, Kevin O'Neill, cried alarm when he assessed McIntyre's interview material, questioned its professionalism and academic rigour. He speaks of "the possibility of a large-scale corruption" of the data.

The judge who listened to the 26 interviews carried out by McIntyre discovered that nine of them contained references to the kidnapping and disappearance of Jean McConville and that in the case of one interviewee this person made no reference to Jean McConville until prompted by McIntyre. In other words, nine of the interviews criss-cross on one incident in the conflict - albeit a tragic and awful killing. Essentially, the trail leads back to Lord Bew (who is the chair of the UK's Committee on Standards in Public Life). Boston College has now disowned his project. Peter Weiler, Boston professor emeritus, said the project has "tarnished the reputation" of the history Department.

Surely Lord Bew, who wrote a piece for a Sunday newspaper, has more to say about this flawed project? Regret? Mistaken in choice of ed Moloney and Anthony McIntyre? "Historians ought to be precise, faithful, and unprejudiced... Nothing should make them swerve from the way of truth," said Cervantes. Well, Lord Bew?