Agreement has been reached on how a public inquiry should deal with operationally sensitive material relating to the Omagh bombing, a hearing has been told.
The Omagh bombing inquiry heard that UK government concerns on a proposed mechanism around sensitive documents had been “alleviated”.
The inquiry, chaired by Lord Turnbull, is holding hearings in Belfast.
The Real IRA bomb in the Co Tyrone town in August 1998 killed 29 people, including a woman who was pregnant with twins, in the worst single atrocity in the Troubles in Northern Ireland.
RM Block
The public inquiry was set up by the previous government to examine whether the explosion could have been prevented by the UK authorities.
Earlier this year, the inquiry heard personal statements from those affected by the massacre.
Lead counsel to the inquiry Paul Greaney KC said the public hearings in Belfast this week would deal with a number of issues, including providing an update on hearings next year relating to the events immediately surrounding the bombing and disclosure issues.
Addressing the inquiry chairman, he said: “The primary purpose of the hearing was to enable you to hear arguments about the process the inquiry proposes to adopt to the handling of operationally sensitive material. Although that argument has dropped away, at least in very substantial part.”
[ The stories of the Omagh bomb victims: from unborn twins to community stalwartsOpens in new window ]
Mr Greaney said the inquiry held material which “contains information which, if published, would be capable of assisting those who would wish to carry out future terrorist attacks”.
He said the inquiry proposed a staged approach to deal with the documents which has “widespread support from the bereaved families and survivors”.
He added: “It is no longer, as of last night and this morning, the subject of any objection or any substantial objection.”
Counsel to the inquiry Edward Pleeth said operationally sensitive material would be divided into the categories of that which contains information about tactics and capabilities used by state authorities and that which describes methods and strategies used by individuals in suspected terrorist acts.
He said the inquiry legal team would assess whether documents it received contained operationally sensitive material which required redaction.
The material provider would then be asked if they agree with that assessment or whether they believe any further material is sensitive and requires redaction.
If there is not agreement between the inquiry legal team and the document provider, the inquiry chairman would be asked to make a bespoke ruling, Mr Pleeth said.
Government barrister Fiona Fee KC said a recent note from the inquiry clarifying and refining the proposed procedure had “alleviated” key concerns.
She added: “HMG’s concern about the principle of seeking to draw a bright-line distinction between operationally sensitive and closed material is considerably alleviated by the potential to apply to the chairman for a bespoke approach should it be necessary.”
The inquiry chairman is hearing further legal submissions from interested parties before he will be asked to endorse the approach over operationally sensitive material.
