Report summary: Joe Humphreys reports on the main questions asked in the Barron report, and looks at how they are answered
With 30 years having passed since the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and the loss of vital documents in the interim, Mr Justice Barron stresses in his report that it is not easy to reach definitive conclusions.
"The magnitude of this task should not be underestimated," he says in his introductory statement to the Oireachtas Joint Committee and the 228-page report which follows argues the point.
The report is divided into five main sections, covering background information, the Garda investigation into the bombings, assessment of the investigation, issues raised by the 1993 Yorkshire Television Hidden Hand television documentary on the bombings and "perpetrators and possible collusion".
Here are the main questions Mr Justice Barron poses and answers:
Who was responsible?
The commission says it is "satisfied" the persons principally responsible for carrying out the bombings were loyalist paramilitaries, most though not all members of the UVF. A number of factors, including information given to the inquiry by a UVF source, "point towards the involvement of two groups - one from Belfast, the other from Portadown/ Lurgan. It is likely that the bombings were conceived and planned in Belfast, with the mid-Ulster element providing operational assistance."
Why did it take place?
The report found the bombings were "primarily a reaction to the Sunningdale Agreement", in particular to the prospect of a greater role for the Irish Government in the administration of Northern Ireland.
It said the timing may have been inspired by a number of important events around that time, including a statement of the Taoiseach, Mr Cosgrave, in April 1974 in which he expressed the hope that formal ratification of the agreement would take place in May; statements by Northern Ireland Secretary, Mr Merlyn Rees, proposing the phasing out of internment and a gradual reduction of the British army presence in Northern Ireland and the advent of the Ulster Workers Council strike.
Was there collusion from British security forces?
The report is inconclusive on the matter, although it says "a finding that members of the security forces in Northern Ireland could have been involved in the bombings is neither fanciful nor absurd, given the number of instances in which similar illegal activity has been proven."
Ultimately, it says, a finding on the matter is one of "inference. On some occasions an inference is irresistible or can be drawn as a matter of probability", but "unless further information comes to hand, such involvement must remain a suspicion. It is not proven."
What evidence is there to suggested there was no collusion?
The report notes "the Monaghan bombing bears all the hallmarks of a standard loyalist operation and required no assistance", while the loyalist groups who bombed Dublin "were capable of doing so without help from any section of the security forces in Northern Ireland".
The report adds: "There is no evidence that any branch of the security forces knew in advance that the bombings were about to take place. This has been reiterated by the current Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and is accepted by the inquiry."
What evidence is there of collusion?
The commission says it believes that within a short time of the bombings taking place, the security forces in Northern Ireland had "good intelligence to suggest who was responsible". In addition, "a number of those suspected for the bombings were reliably said to have had relationships with British intelligence and/or RUC Special Branch officers".
Noting the possibility that Northern security forces may have been reluctant to compromise these relationships, it says "there remains a deep suspicion that the investigation into the bombings was hampered by such factors, but it cannot be put further than that".
What about possible Garda wrongdoing?
The report says there have been no allegations that any agency in the State played a "deliberate part" in the bombings. However, it said allegations were made that members of the Garda "were actively co-operating with the security forces in Northern Ireland in ways that were not officially sanctioned".
The report says it is clear the British authorities were very keen to open such lines of communication. "In the circumstances, if contacts between gardaí and the British army/intelligence services were pursued informally, it could not be condoned, but it would be understandable."
Was the Garda investigation adequate?
The report criticises the Garda investigation for failing "to make full use of the information it obtained". Certain lines of inquiry were not pursued and certain suspects were not questioned. "The main failure of the Garda investigation team was not to act promptly," the report says.
Other criticisms of the investigation were "a failure to appreciate the extent of the information obtained", "a too-ready acceptance of information supplied" and the loss of "potentially vital clues" such as information on whether the Dublin bombs were made from purely commercial explosives.
Did the Government hamper the investigation?
The report found "no evidence" to support the proposition that the Garda investigation was wound down as a result of political interference.
The suggestion is "absolutely denied" by former government members with the Minister for Justice at the time, Mr Patrick Cooney, pointing out that any such direction would have been "grossly improper".
"However," the report says, "it can be said that the Government of the day showed little interest in the bombings.
"When information was given to them suggesting that the British authorities had intelligence naming the bombers, this was not followed up. Any follow-up was limited to complaints by the Minister for Foreign Affairs that those involved had been released from internment."
Were later investigations handled appropriately?
The report says it is "surprising" that no effort was made to check allegations by former military intelligence officer Mr Fred Holroyd to the effect that he received information on suspects for the bombings from an RUC officer.
As for the Hidden Hand documentary, the report says Garda officers may have done more to investigate allegations arising from the programme "but ultimately, their failures spring from the manner in which their superiors allowed such inves- tigations to be carried out, as well as the lack of proper direction."
Why was vital documentation lost?
The report found "no explanation" for the fact that Department of Justice files on the matter are "missing in their entirety". Nor was it possible to indicate when they went missing. The former Minister for Justice Ms Máire Geoghegan-Quinn told the inquiry that there was "very little" in the departmental files concerning the bombings.
Did anyone obstruct the commission's work?
Bemoaning the lack of original documentation, the report notes that correspondence with the Northern Ireland Office undoubtedly produced some useful information. "But its value was reduced by the reluctance to make original documents available and the refusal to supply other information on security grounds. While the inquiry fully understands the position taken by the British government on these matters, it must be said that the scope of this report is limited as a result."