Introduction

The case of McQuillan v Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) [2017] NIQB 28 presents a significant examination of the obligations under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) concerning the right to life and the subsequent duty to conduct an effective investigation into unlawful killings. Margaret McQuillan, the applicant, challenged the PSNI's authority to further investigate the 1972 death of her sister, Jean Smyth, arguing that the PSNI lacked the necessary independence to carry out an unbiased inquiry due to potential ties with the Ministry of Defence (MOD) and historical investigative shortcomings.

Summary of the Judgment

The High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland's Queen's Bench Division granted Margaret McQuillan's application for judicial review, declaring that the proposed investigation by the Legacy Investigation Branch (LIB) of the PSNI into her sister's death conflicted with Article 2 of the ECHR. The court concluded that the LIB lacked the requisite independence necessary for an Article 2 compliant investigation, primarily due to historical failings in the original police investigation and subsequent reviews by the Historical Enquiries Team (HET). These shortcomings eroded public confidence and created a perception of bias, thereby failing the standard expected under Article 2.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment extensively referenced prior cases and reports to frame its analysis:

• Brecknell v United Kingdom (2008) 46 EHRR 957: Established that authorities have an obligation to reopen investigations into unlawful killings when new credible evidence emerges.
• Nachova v Bulgaria (2006) 42 EHRR 43: Emphasized the necessity for independent and impartial investigative bodies under Article 2.
• R (Mousa) v Secretary of State for Defence [2012] HRLR 6: Highlighted that public perception of independence is crucial, even if no actual bias exists.
• Ramsahai v Netherlands (2008) 46 EHRR 43: Differentiated between the RUC and PSNI regarding investigatory independence.
• Reports by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) scrutinizing the HET's independence.

Legal Reasoning

The court's reasoning centered on the principle that investigations into unlawful killings must be conducted by bodies perceived as independent to maintain public confidence. Drawing from Brecknell, the court underscored that new evidence, such as the military logs discovered in 2014, imposes an obligation on authorities to reassess the case. However, given the historical ties between the RUC (the predecessor to the PSNI) and the MOD, alongside the LIB's integration into the PSNI, the court found that the LIB could not be viewed as sufficiently independent.

Furthermore, the court considered criticisms of the HET, which had similar independence issues, as detailed in academic and HMIC reports. The persistent concerns about the HET, even after its transition to the LIB, reinforced the perception of bias. The court emphasized that the absence of rigorous and impartial investigation processes in both the original inquiry and the HET's review process created a reasonable doubt about the LIB's capability to conduct an unbiased investigation.

Impact

This judgment sets a critical precedent for the operation of investigatory bodies under the ECHR framework. It reinforces the necessity for not only actual independence but also the perception of independence in investigative authorities. Future cases involving historical deaths or potential state involvement will likely reference this decision to argue for the establishment of wholly autonomous investigatory agencies, free from institutional or hierarchical ties that could compromise their impartiality.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Conclusion

The McQuillan v PSNI [2017] NIQB 28 judgment underscores the paramount importance of independent investigations in upholding the rights enshrined in Article 2 of the ECHR. By highlighting historical investigative failings and the resultant erosion of public confidence, the court affirmed that the integrity of investigatory bodies is crucial not only for justice in individual cases but also for the broader maintenance of legal and societal trust. This case serves as a pivotal reference point for ensuring that future investigations into unlawful killings are conducted with the utmost impartiality and independence, safeguarding the rights of victims and their families.