The Saville tribunal ruled yesterday that a former British agent who was active in the Bogside around the time of Bloody Sunday will be entitled to anonymity when giving witness evidence.
The tribunal decided against an application on behalf of the man, known as Observer B, that he should be allowed to give evidence on an audio link only, to keep his appearance secret from all parties to the inquiry.
It ruled that he be permitted to testify by video link, which will be visible only to the tribunal, its staff and to legal representatives.
Delivering the tribunal's ruling, Mr William Hoyt, of Canada, who is sitting with Lord Saville and Sir Edward Somers of New Zealand, described Observer B as a former agent for the British army and for the Security Service (Secret Service).
Mr Hoyt said that Observer B's witness statement disclosed that before January 30th, 1972, he observed what he assumed were training exercises of IRA auxiliaries and later had conversations with persons who claimed to be present during Bloody Sunday and who referred to firearms being distributed and fired by people other than British soldiers. Attached to this statement were copies of Security Service documents relating to reports made by Observer B and some of these were redacted (had sections deleted or blanked out) by the security services.
Mr Hoyt said that the redacted sections had not been seen by either the tribunal or Observer B. He added: "No claim for Public Interest Immunity has yet been made by the Security Service in respect of these redactions. We understand that such a claim will be made. Unless that claim is made shortly, we shall require unredacted copies of these documents to be delivered by the Security Service to the tribunal."
The inquiry was told on Wednesday that one of Observer B's Security Service "handlers" says in a statement that this informer was passed on to them by the army and that he was "the source of just about everything we knew about Londonderry".
Counsel for the next-of-kin of Bloody Sunday victims argued strongly against the granting of anonymity to Observer B.
The inquiry was told by the chairman, Lord Saville, yesterday that legal advisers of another potential witness, identified only as PIN 437, who is said to have evidence about non-army firing on Bloody Sunday, are considering applying for a judicial review of the tribunal's ruling against his application for anonymity.
The tribunal had also refused to withhold publication of a document relating to this man, but had agreed to delay its disclosure for 24 hours to enable him to indicate his willingness to provide a statement to the inquiry. The document and his statement would then be published simultaneously.
Yesterday, Lord Saville said that because of the possibility of a judicial review application, the tribunal would extend the time before it would disclose the document in question to 4 p.m. on June 23rd.
Mr Alan Roxburgh, one of the tribunal's counsel, said yesterday that its solicitors had now interviewed a total of 626 military witnesses, of whom 447 had signed their statements and 179 had not. The inquiry has received 251 of these signed statements and the remainder are at present being redacted to remove material which would identify individual soldiers. This is necessary because of a British higher court ruling last year which reversed a tribunal ruling and granted anonymity to the soldiers.
The tribunal yesterday set a deadline of July 30th for the production of signed statements by those soldiers who have held draft statements or statements for signature for more than a month. Failing production of signed statements in that time, the tribunal proposes to distribute the draft statements.
Much of yesterday's proceedings in the Guildhall were taken up with the viewing of a series of television documentaries and newsreel material on Bloody Sunday, including uncut footage.
Inquiry internet site, with proceedings to date, is at http://www.bloody-Sunday-inquiry.org.uk