NI secretary rejects claims Troubles legacy bill amounts to amnesty for soldiers

Proposed amendments require attorney general consent for serious prosecutions, sparking debate over fairness and victims' rights

By LineZotpaper

Published19 October 2026

Read Time2 min

Northern Ireland Secretary Chris Bryant has defended planned changes to the government's Troubles legacy bill, rejecting accusations that requiring the attorney general's consent for serious prosecutions amounts to an amnesty for former soldiers. The amendments, debated in the Commons on Monday, are part of Labour's attempt to replace the previous Conservative government's 2023 Legacy Act, which was largely disapplied after courts found its immunity provisions unlawful.

Sir Chris told BBC News NI it was 'completely wrong' to suggest the requirement was designed to pardon veterans, calling it a 'sensible measure' for consistency. Under the proposals, the attorney general must consent to all serious Troubles-related prosecutions, a role Sir Chris said was recommended by a Westminster human rights committee.

Victims' groups have voiced strong opposition. Mark Thompson of Relatives for Justice told the BBC's Sunday Politics programme he feared the bill could lead to unlawful killings being covered up by the state, accusing the government of removing decisions from local courts after judges ruled against the Army in multiple inquests. 'What they want to do is lift it out of a rule of law process and bring it to London and have a political decision,' he said.

However, lawyer Philip Barden, representing several ex-soldiers, argued veterans had been 'put through the mill' in cases with 'no evidence'. He said the government's choice of the UK attorney general was independent, noting that judicial review remains available. Veterans' 'primary cause of concern', he added, was repeat investigations without new evidence.

The bill also establishes a legacy commission to investigate Troubles-related killings, a separate information recovery body, and a dedicated unit within the Irish police. The government says the amendments 'significantly reduce' the prospect of veterans facing repeated investigations.

Victims' commissioner Joe McVey described the bill as 'not perfect' but urged progress, adding that if not passed now, it would be 'very difficult to predict when it's going to get a hearing again'. Natasha Butler, whose grandfather was killed by the Army in 1972, said families had 'waited decades' for answers and must not be lost in the politics.

Analysis

Why This Matters

The bill aims to resolve the legacy of the Troubles, which cost over 3,500 lives, but remains deeply divisive between veterans' advocates and victims' families.
The requirement for attorney general consent shifts prosecutorial power from Northern Ireland to London, raising concerns about local judicial independence and political interference.
Failure to pass legislation could leave victims without closure and veterans facing ongoing investigations, perpetuating a cycle of legal uncertainty.

Background

The Troubles was a 30-year conflict in Northern Ireland involving republican and loyalist paramilitaries, British security forces, and the public. The previous Conservative government's 2023 Legacy Act introduced immunity for suspects who cooperated with an information recovery body, but that provision was struck down by courts as unlawful. Labour's current bill attempts to replace that act with a new framework agreed with the Irish government, including a legacy commission and separate information recovery body.

Key Perspectives

[Victims' families and their advocates]: They fear the amendments amount to a state cover-up, particularly after courts had previously ruled against the Army in inquests at Ballymurphy and Springhill. They want local courts to retain oversight and argue the bill lacks a victim-centred focus. [Veterans and their representatives]: They argue that soldiers have faced repeated investigations without credible evidence and need an independent process free from perceived bias in Northern Ireland. They support the attorney general role as a safeguard and note judicial review remains available. [Government and officials]: The NI secretary insists the bill is not an amnesty but ensures consistency. The PPS says it has considerable legacy experience and will continue to act impartialy. The Labour governovernment position is that the bill significantly reduces 'rinse and repeat' investigations while complying with human rights standards.

What to Watch

The outcome of Monday's Commons debate and any further amendments that may alter the attorney general's role.
The bill's progress through the House of Lords, where peers may push for stronger victims' rights protections.
Whether the Irish government or Northern Ireland political parties seek legal challenges over the jurisdiction changes.

Sources

Troubles legacy bill is not an amnesty for soldiers - NI secretary · BBC News

Checked

12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 9 supported.

Show each claim

SupportedHeadline: Secretary Chris Bryant rejects claims that the Troubles legacy bill amounts to an amnesty for soldiers.BBC News: “The secretary of state for Northern Ireland has rejected claims that planned changes to the government's Troubles legacy bill amount to an "amnesty" for former soldiers.”
SupportedSummary: the proposed amendments require attorney general consent for serious prosecutions.BBC News: “the attorney general must consent to all serious Troubles-related prosecutions”
SupportedThe amendments were debated in the Commons on Monday.BBC News: “being debated by MPs on Monday after the long-awaited legislation returned to the House of Commons”
Partly supportedThe 2023 Legacy Act was 'largely disapplied' after courts found its immunity provisions unlawful.BBC News: “The act's most controversial element - offering immunity from prosecution to suspects who cooperated with an information recovery body - was disapplied after being found by the courts to be unlawful.”
SupportedBryant said it was 'completely wrong' to suggest the consent requirement was designed to pardon veterans.BBC News: “Sir Chris Bryant said it was "completely wrong" to suggest a requirement for the attorney general to consent to serious Troubles-related prosecutions was designed to pardon veterans.”
SupportedBryant called the measure a 'sensible measure' for consistency, and said the consent role was recommended by a Westminster human rights committee.BBC News: “it was a "sensible measure" to ensure there was "more consistency" in how decisions are made”
SupportedMark Thompson of Relatives for Justice said the bill could lead to unlawful killings being covered up by the state, and quoted: 'What they want to do is lift it out of a rule of law process and bring it to London and have a political decision.'BBC News: “What they [the government] want to do is lift it out of a rule of law process and bring it to London and have a political decision.”
Partly supportedThompson accused the government of removing decisions from local courts after judges ruled against the Army in multiple inquests.BBC News: “He accused the government of trying to take "control" away from local courts because it did not like some of the recent rulings in Troubles-era cases. He pointed out that judges had ruled against the Army in "dozens" of inquests”
SupportedPhilip Barden, representing several ex-soldiers, said veterans had been 'put through the mill' in cases with 'no evidence'.BBC News: “claimed Army veterans were "put through the mill" in cases where there was "no evidence".”
Partly supportedVictims' groups have voiced strong opposition to the bill.BBC News: “Mark Thompson from the victims' group Relatives For Justice said he feared the bill could lead to unlawful killings being covered up by the state.”
SupportedVictims' commissioner Joe McVey said that if the bill is not passed now, it would be 'very difficult to predict when it's going to get a hearing again'.BBC News: “If we don't do it this time, then I think it'll be very difficult to predict when it's going to get a hearing again.”
SupportedNatasha Butler's grandfather was killed by the Army in 1972, and families have 'waited decades' for answers.BBC News: “Natasha Butler's grandfather, Paddy Butler, was killed by the Army on the Springhill estate in Belfast in July 1972.”

Correction

19 October 2026An earlier version of this story quoted Mark Thompson as saying the bill could lead to “control and cover up”. He said he feared unlawful killings could be covered up by the state and separately accused the government of taking control away from local courts.