The British Army has always known that Sinn Féin's Mr Martin McGuinness did not open fire on soldiers on Bloody Sunday, it was claimed today.
A former army intelligence officer said he saw documents which showed the Sinn Féin's chief negotiator was under surveillance on Bloody Sunday and did not fire a weapon.
The evidence of the ex-soldier, known by the pseudonym "Martin Ingram", contradicts allegations by an IRA informant codenamed "Infliction" who claimed Mr McGuinness told him he fired the first shot on Bloody Sunday.
In a new statement to the Saville Inquiry, it is understood Ingram stands by his assertion that he saw no evidence that Mr McGuinness opened fire on soldiers on Bloody Sunday.
Ingram said he saw intelligence reports that Mr McGuinness was under surveillance but was not seen using a gun on January 30th, 1972 when 13 civil rights marchers were shot dead by soldiers in Londonderry. A 14th man died later.
The former agent, who is due to enter the witness box on May 12th, also said he doubted the accuracy of Infliction's allegations against Mr McGuinness.
However, after originally questioning Infliction's existence, Ingram's third statement now accepts it after it was confirmed to him by a senior police officer via a journalist.
The agent has also claimed there was intelligence available to show neither the Official or Provisional IRA intended to engage in violence on Bloody Sunday.
Mr McGuinness, who has admitted to being the IRA's second-in-command in Derry at the time, has denied he fired any shots on Bloody Sunday.
A special hearing at Methodist Central Hall in London today considered applications from Ingram and British Defence Secretary Mr Geoff Hoon for Ingram to give his evidence from behind a screen.
Mr Hoon called on the Saville Inquiry to ensure Ingram was not questioned about any secret intelligence matters and insisted his real name and identity must not be disclosed.
He said Ingram would be an attractive target for republican paramilitaries who would be keen to seize, torture, interrogate and murder him.
Mr Ian Burnett, QC, representing the Ministry of Defence, claimed it would be helpful to take a fourth statement from Ingram and to have questions given to him before he entered the witness box.
"Mr Ingram has thus far made three statements, I think. His second and third statements, it may be thought, represent something of a rowing back from the position that he adopted in his first statement," Mr Burnett added.
Mr David Waters, QC, representing Mr Ingram, agreed that prior notification of the questions to be asked of his client would be helpful.
However, lawyers acting for the families of those killed and injured on Bloody Sunday said this would not be fair and insisted they should be able to question the former agent freely.
Meanwhile, a new application from Mr McGuinness to the Saville Inquiry to dismiss any information gained from Infliction was also rejected during today's hearing.
Mr Peter Cush, representing the Sinn Fein MP, said: "It may be cynical but nonetheless not necessarily incorrect to suggest that those organs of the state may well take the view that it would be very nice if the spotlight which has been turned on the soldiers was turned on someone else, ie Mr McGuinness.
"Is it not somewhat fortuitous that at this time, this bit of information about Mr McGuinness, which apparently has been secret since 1984, somehow falls into the lap of the Inquiry?"
Mr Cush said the "organs of the state" had put every obstacle in the way of Mr McGuinness and the other interested parties in cross-examining the peripheral witnesses.
"We say, in those circumstances, the tribunal, at the very least, should revisit this issue and determine whether or not they should have any regard whatsoever to the material in question," he added.
Lord Saville said he could not accept Mr Cush's application to overturn an earlier ruling which allowed material relating to Infliction to be used by the Inquiry.
"It seems to us that the submissions we have heard are submissions that can, and should, properly be made when all the evidence is available to the inquiry at the end of the day," he added.
Lord Saville said he would give a ruling on Ingram's application for screening and anonymity as "soon as we possibly can".
It is expected it will be delivered next week.
Colonel Derek Wilford, the officer commanding paratroopers on Bloody Sunday, will return to the witness box tomorrow to continue his evidence on the 320th day of the inquiry.
The Saville Inquiry, which usually sits at the Guildhall in Derry, is currently hearing evidence from military witnesses and others in London because of concerns for their safety.
PA