The British government came under pressure from a Labour backbencher and Sinn Fein yesterday to review its decision to maintain non-jury Diplock Courts for terrorist-related offences in Northern Ireland.
The non-jury system for scheduled offences has been operating in Northern Ireland since 1973 and in December last year the British Home Secretary, Mr Jack Straw, announced a review of Diplock court arrangements in parallel with measures before parliament to establish UK-wide anti-terrorism measures.
The government's Review Group on Diplock courts reported earlier this month and the decision to maintain the use of Diplock courts was confirmed by the Northern Ireland Minister, Mr Adam Ingram, in a Commons written reply to Labour's former Northern Ireland spokesman, Mr Kevin McNamara, on July 18th.
Mr Ingram said that while the overall objective was to see a return to jury trials for all offences, it agreed with the recommendation of the review group "that the time is not yet right for such a move".
Mr McNamara said the review group report was "very unsatisfactory" and did not appear to have "the urgency of the Good Friday agreement of the need to make a fresh start". He called on Mr Blair's government to consider returning to previous Labour policy, saying jury trial could be reinstated and the attorney general could be given the power to decide which cases could be "opted in" to the Diplock system.
In its report on the Diplock courts, the review group concluded there was a general consensus that jury trial should be restored as soon as possible, but "the question is one of timing".
Representatives from departments including the Northern Ireland Office, the Home Office, the Northern Ireland Courts Service and the RUC took part in the review, concluding that an immediate return to jury trial was not possible.
The group said it was "not persuaded" that a return to jury trial at this time would provide for the fair and effective administration of justice, that the safety of jurors could be guaranteed or that the community as a whole would have the necessary confidence in the system.
It went on to say the risk of juror intimidation, the risk of perverse verdicts and the assessment of the level of the security threat must be kept under review in considering a return to jury trial.
The British government has said it will consider the points raised by the review group.
The decision to retain the Diplock courts was criticised by nationalist politicians. Mr Gerry Kelly, of Sinn Fein, described the courts as "war tribunals" which over the past 30 years had been "used as a political whip" by "securocrats` against those who did not fit in with their vision of society.
He said the jury system, while not perfect, was fair and he dismissed suggestions that jury intimidation was an issue. Mr Kelly said safeguards were in place for jurors to be excused if intimidated or discharged.
The SDLP's criminal justice spokesman, Mr Alex Attwood, criticised the decision, which he said came about as a result of recommendations from a very biased group made up from organisations such as the British Home Office and the RUC.
"We are not at all surprised that this government review did not recommend the abolition of the Diplock courts. The government review group did not contain any independent members or experts on human rights. So the outcome is predictable -, no change."
Mr Attwood added: "The Diplock courts have been associated with injustice in Northern Ireland. It is a matter of deep regret that the British government has not grasped the chance to normalise the administration of justice, create greater confidence in the rule of law and send a compelling signal that the old order is gone for good."
Mr Ian Paisley jnr, justice spokesman for the DUP, said it was regrettable that there remained a threat to jurors in the North as "everyone would welcome the return to a normal jury system in Northern Ireland".
The fact that this was not possible "explodes the myth of the peace process", he said.
"If there was a real peace process there would be no need for Diplock courts. What this decision shows is that paramilitarism is on the increase and not the decrease."