Opinion

Soldier F case needs cool heads

It has been well documented that a former British soldier is to be prosecuted for the murder of two young men and the attempted murder of four others on Bloody Sunday in Derry in 1971.

The defendant, to date identified solely as Soldier F, is the only person to face charges over the shootings by the Parachute Regiment which left 14 civilians dead and a further 14 wounded during a civil rights march in the city.

It is essential that justice is served and the case is able to reach a fair and reasonable outcome on the basis of evidence placed before the courts without any form of outside interference.

Politicians from both the nationalist and unionist traditions here generally have a good understanding of their responsibilities in this regard and tend to frame their public comments accordingly.

However, there was considerable concern over the reaction from the British defence minister Gavin Williamson to the announcement of the Bloody Sunday charges earlier this month when he expressed regret that it had not been possible to protect former British soldiers from `spurious prosecutions’.

He went on to confirm that the Ministry of Defence would both support Soldier F and pay all his legal costs, saying, `We are indebted to those soldiers who served with courage and distinction to bring peace to Northern Ireland’.

Mr Williamson could only have been well aware of the impact his intervention was likely to make, and it would be appropriate if his statement received the full attention of the Attorney General.

It will also be widely noted that a large banner has been erected in a Co Antrim town carrying the slogan `Carrickfergus stands with soldier F – stop persecuting our veterans’.

As we reported yesterday, a large number of flags featuring the insignia of the Parachute Regiment have appeared in the same area over recent days.

Police have been very reluctant to take action over provocative displays of this nature in the past, suggesting that issues needed to be resolved by `the local community’ and that they could only respond when there was a serious risk to public safety.

Such a policy was always difficult to justify and a blatant attempt to promote political messages directly linked to an extremely high profile prosecution must surely be regarded as unacceptable.

The case of Soldier F needs to run its course without fear or favour, and looking the other way when it is instead surrounded by offensive symbols and emblems in any location should not be regarded as an option by the authorities