Northern Ireland’s Secretary of State has launched urgent High Court action to prevent disclosure of sensitive information at a loyalist paramilitary murder victim’s inquest.
Chris Heaton-Harris is seeking a judicial review of the decision by the coroner examining the circumstances surrounding the death of Fergal McCusker.
Mr McCusker, 28, was shot dead by the LVF in Maghera, Co Derry as he made his way home from a night out in January 1998.
No-one has ever been prosecuted or convicted of his killing.
Lawyers representing Mr Heaton-Harris are challenging the coroner’s determination that a limited summary, or gist, of information protected by a Public Interest Immunity (PII) certificate should be made available.
Proceedings have also been brought on behalf of the Home Secretary and the Advocate General for Northern Ireland.
It is contended that disclosure of the material would damage national security interests, breaching the Government’s policy of neither confirming nor denying any relevant issues.
Papers lodged in court seek a declaration that the coroner’s decision is unlawful and should be quashed.
At a brief hearing on Tuesday Tony McGleenan KC, for the British Government confirmed an agreement had been reached to “hold the ring” on any disclosure until the coroner sits again on Wednesday.
With all conflict-era inquests set to shut down on May 1 under the new Troubles Legacy Act, doubts were raised about whether the hearing will be completed in time.
Mr Justice Humphreys was told there are now only “a handful” of working days before the deadline.
But the barrister insisted: “The matter remains pressing, as the coroner may well take a certain course of action tomorrow that would result in the disclosure of certain materials.”
During the hearing the judge asked if the Secretary of State and PSNI Chief Constable Jon Boutcher “see eye to eye” on the disclosure decision.
Counsel for Mr Boutcher responded that he was unable to say much at this stage.
Barra McGrory KC, representing the McCusker family, suggested there may have been “a difference of opinion” on the issue.
He added: “We haven’t even had a gist of the gist, so we are completely in the dark about the nature of the disagreement.”
Adjourning the challenge until later in the week, Mr Justice Humphreys indicated that they should wait for the coroner to set out his intentions.