The former Sinn Fein president was responding to the Prime Minister’s pledge to look at “every conceivable way” to stop people detained without trial during the Northern Ireland conflict from seeking payouts on a legal technicality over who signed the orders to incarcerate them.
Mr Adams’ remarks come amid a controversy over Sir Keir Starmer’s plan to repeal legislation that would have blocked such claims.
The legislative provisions are included in the last government’s contentious Legacy Act, which also offered a form of conditional immunity to perpetrators of Troubles killings.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer addressed the issue during PMQs (Leon Neal/PA)
The current government’s intention to repeal elements of the Legacy Act that have been found by a High Court judge to be unlawful were announced last July, with a subsequent draft remedial order to achieve that outcome tabled in December.
The issue garnered greater political scrutiny on Wednesday following the publication of a report by think tank Policy Exchange that criticised the Government’s move, portraying it as paving the way for taxpayer-funded pay days for Mr Adams and other ex-detainees.
Kemi Badenoch raised the issue during Prime Minister’s Questions, claiming that Sir Keir’s Government “may write a cheque to compensate Gerry Adams”.
“This is shameful,” the Conservative Party leader said.
Sir Keir replied: “That Act was unfit not least because it gave immunity to hundreds of terrorists and wasn’t supported by victims in Northern Ireland, nor I believe by any of the political parties in Northern Ireland.
“The court found it unlawful. We will put in place a better framework, we’re working on a draft remedial order and replacement legislation, and we will look at every conceivable way to prevent these types of cases claiming damages.
“It’s important I say that on the record.”
Reacting to Sir Keir’s remarks, Mr Adams urged caution and said there was a need to see what the Government was proposing.
“When the legislation is changed there will almost certainly be further legal process in the courts before there is clarity on this matter,” he said.
“But no one should be surprised by a British government seeking to dodge its lawful and human rights responsibilities.”
The relevant sections of the Legacy Act had been agreed by Parliament in 2023, following late amendments, in response to a Supreme Court judgment in 2020 that paved the way for Mr Adams to secure compensation over his internment without trial in the early 1970s.
Mr Adams won his appeal to overturn historical convictions for two attempted prison breaks, after he was interned without trial in 1973 at Long Kesh internment camp, also known as Maze Prison, near Lisburn.
The Supreme Court ruled that his detention was unlawful because the interim custody order (ICO) used to initially detain him had not been “considered personally” by then secretary of state for Northern Ireland Willie Whitelaw.
At the time of the case, the previous government contended that the ICOs were lawful thanks to a long-standing convention, known as the Carltona principle, where officials and junior ministers routinely act in the name of the Secretary of State.
Mr Adams subsequently successfully challenged a decision to deny an application for compensation for his detention.
However, the Legacy Act stopped such payouts to Mr Adams and other former internees with similar cases.
The Act retrospectively validated the ICOs to make them lawful and halted civil claims related to the orders.
At the time, the then UK government said the legislation would prevent up to 400 compensation bids by former internees.
However, in February last year, the High Court in Belfast ruled that the provisions of the Act related to the ICOs were incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.
The current government did not appeal against that judgment and tabled the draft remedial order in Parliament in December that will repeal various parts of the Legacy Act, including the sections on ICOs.
Commenting on the legal situation, Mr Adams said: “The decision by the Supreme Court in 2020 was explicit. Interim Custody Orders not authorised and approved by the Secretary of State are illegal. The British government has accepted this. It is a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.”
He added: “Mr Starmer’s comments reflect the infamous assertion of British General Frank Kitson who said ‘The law should be used as just another weapon in the government’s arsenal, in which case it becomes little more than a propaganda cover for the disposal of unwanted members of the public’.”
It is understood Government officials are currently exploring ways to achieve a similar block on compensation claims for internees as part of a new wider piece of legislation on legacy issues.
However, given the High Court determined it was unlawful to act retrospectively on the ICO issue, there is feeling within Whitehall that the Government faces a significant challenge to find a lawful way of achieving its desired outcome.
The fact the Supreme Court has already ruled on the unlawfulness of the ICOs is seen as a further challenge in finding a lawful means to prevent claims from former internees who were subject to orders not signed by a secretary of state.
Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch criticised the Government’s plan (Lucy North/PA)
On Wednesday, Downing Street could not guarantee that compensation payouts would be prevented.
“Clearly, the Government’s intention is to prevent compensation from being paid. We are going to look at every option but I can’t get ahead of that process,” the Prime Minister’s official spokesman said when asked about a guarantee.
Asked if there are real, conceivable options to block payments, he said: “The Prime Minister wouldn’t make the commitment on the floor of the House if he didn’t think we could address this issue.
“But as I say, it is a complex area and we have been left with a real mess when it comes to the Northern Ireland Legacy Act, which was completely unfit for purpose.”
A spokesman for Mrs Badenoch said there were “almost certainly” no circumstances in which she would support awarding compensation.
“But we are going to need to see what the Bill is that the Prime Minister comes forward with,” the Opposition leader’s spokesman said.
Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn said “nobody wants to see” Mr Adams paid compensation for his detention but defended the decision to repeal.
He told the Commons: “Nobody wants to see that but the Supreme Court judgment which ruled that the interim custody orders following internment were not lawfully put in place, in which the Carltona principle was much discussed, was in 2020.
“The last government did nothing about that for three years until they belatedly accepted an amendment in the House of Lords which has now been found to be unlawful.”
He was urged by his shadow counterpart Alex Burghart to “return to the previous cross-party position that we have to block compensation payments to terrorists such as Gerry Adams”.
Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn (Lucy North/PA)
The minister vowed to “continue to see if we can find a lawful way of dealing with the issue that he has identified”.
Meanwhile, Attorney General Lord Richard Hermer KC, who previously represented Mr Adams as a lawyer, came under fire when questioned by MPs for refusing to confirm whether he had advised the Government on repealing the laws.
Lord Hermer told the Commons Justice Committee that convention for law officers under the ministerial code “precludes” him from saying whether he had been asked to advise on any matters or detail any advice given.
Pressed by Conservative committee member Sir Ashley Fox in a lengthy exchange on Wednesday morning, he also said he could not “recall” if he acted for Mr Adams on “any form of conditional fee agreement”, adding: “Even if I could recall, I’m not sure I would feel inclined to answer a question as to the basis on which I was paid by any given client.
“I did represent Gerry Adams on something unconnected to the Legacy.
“As it happens, as a reflection of our legal system, at the same time I was representing the family of a young British soldier murdered by the IRA in the 1970s.
“Now both clients understood the importance of being able to represent everybody. That’s what a legal system is all about. And my concern about attacks on lawyers for doing particular cases, is that it undermines faith in the legal system,” Lord Hermer said.
Sir Ashley replied that it was “unacceptable” for him to “hide behind (convention) and refuse to answer questions on the merits of the case, and then speak about the importance of the rule of law”, adding that this “undermines faith in politicians”.
The Policy Exchange report criticising the repeal move was backed by 16 peers, including shadow attorney general Lord Wolfson KC.
“The Government’s decision to repeal sections 46 and 47 of the Northern Troubles Act 2023 is inexplicable and unexplained,” Lord Wolfson said.