Each individual family of the Bloody Sunday deceased, and each individual wounded are, by law, entitled to individual legal representation at the new Bloody Sunday Inquiry, announced by Prime Minister Blair on January 29th, 1998.

Characteristically, in an inquiry of this magnitude, such legal representation will comprise a firm of solicitors and a senior and junior counsel. In his opening statement on April 3rd, 1998, Lord Saville, chairman of the inquiry, said:

"We would invite all those who wish to be legally represented at the inquiry to write to the Inquiry Solicitor requesting that they be given the right to legal representation."

Therefore, in principle, if the families and wounded exercised their right to individual representation, this would potentially involve the engagement of 84 lawyers dealing only with the legal rights of those most affected by the murderous brutality of the 1st Battalion Parachute Regiment on January 30th, 1972, in Derry.

However, in his next paragraph, Lord Saville stated:

"It seems to us that the opportunity must be taken for those with similar interests to join together for the purposes of legal representation. If their legitimate interests can be properly met by joint legal representation, there would simply be no point in having separate legal representation. We would therefore urge all those concerned who have similar interests to consider together how best to deal with this point."

In response to Lord Saville's suggestion and in consultation with the Bloody Sunday families and wounded, Peter Madden, of Madden & Finucane, assembled the following legal team:

Three senior and three junior counsel representing the Bloody Sunday families; two senior and two junior counsel representing the Bloody Sunday wounded; three individual solicitors in Derry, collating in excess of 600 civilian witness statements and taking statements from new witnesses; one solicitor in Dublin dealing with the political and historical context within which Bloody Sunday occurred; and one Solicitor Firm, Madden & Finucane, co-ordinating the legal team, their preparation, and their engagement with the Inquiry.

The above team is little more than 20 per cent of the legal entitlement of the Bloody Sunday wounded and families, and is considered by them to be the minimum necessary to provide adequate and "proper" legal representation at the Inquiry.

The Saville Inquiry, however, are now attempting to reduce the legal representation of the families and wounded to one senior counsel, two junior counsel, and one firm of solicitors.

In his report, "The Bloody Sunday Tribunal of Inquiry", Prof Dermot Walsh of the University of Limerick Law School made the following criticism of the Widgery Tribunal:

"Given that the evidence of the soldiers was to the effect that they shot only at gunmen and bombers, it follows that their families were all entitled to their own separate legal representation . . . at the outset . . . Lord Widgery . . . declared that he saw no need for the individual deceased to be represented separately. The effect of this, of course, was that a single legal team consisting of a senior counsel and a junior counsel would have to carry the burden of representing the interests of a large number of separate individuals."

A further, and perhaps more serious, twist resulted from Lord Widgery's wish that the views of the people of Derry who might be critical of the army should also be represented, and that representation should be provided by counsel for the relatives. The inevitable effect of this decision was that the single legal team representing the relatives of the deceased also had to represent the wounded and the nationalist citizenry of Derry. This was a huge burden to place on such slender resources and could only result in the representation of the individual deceased being stretched beyond breaking point.

The Saville Inquiry has also informed Madden & Finucane that they will consider awarding legal costs only after they provide the Inquiry with full details of why and for what purpose. It is apparent that by controlling the legal costs and the legal representation of the Bloody Sunday families and wounded, the inquiry effectively disadvantages their legal representation. It also means they can monitor their preparations every step of the way. It is the view of the families and their legal team that everything they tell the Saville Inquiry regarding their preparation will, one way or another, find its way to the Ministry of Defence and the British army's legal team.

Madden & Finucane, on instruction from the families and wounded, consider it essential to engage their own independent experts in the fields of forensic pathology, ballistics, sound analysis etc. The Saville Inquiry, however, is also questioning the necessity of the families' legal team to engage their own experts.

IF this situation is not resolved, Madden & Finucane has been instructed by the families and wounded to disengage.

Additionally, even if the Saville Inquiry allows the families and wounded the legal representation sought, there is still the very real possibility that the full costs of that legal representation will not be met.

The conduct of the Saville Inquiry team has, to date, been both disturbing and disappointing. At this juncture, the inquiry team seems determined to frustrate the legal entitlement of the wounded and families, and their generous response to Lord Saville's request to consider joint legal representation.

The issue of legal representation of the families, the wounded and other interested parties is to be considered at a preliminary hearing in Derry's Guildhall on July 20th, 1998. In a press release which the Bloody Sunday families and wounded issued on June 17th, 1998, they stated:

"Any attempt by Lord Saville to reduce and weaken our legal representation at the inquiry will cause us to seriously reconsider our current willingness to participate in the Saville Inquiry."

One family, the Wrays, have already withdrawn on the basis that they do not have confidence in the new inquiry. For the remaining families, the wounded and many in the nationalist community in Derry and beyond, the outcome of this hearing will be a litmus test.

One issue is very clear. The families and the wounded, who have endured the trauma of 26 years of campaigning for justice, will not engage with Saville (nor should they be expected to), if the new inquiry has even the slightest smell of being a Widgery Mark II.

From a nationalist perspective, it is a British inquiry, with a British hand-picked panel, investigating a British military massacre of unarmed Irish citizens seeking civil rights. It is recognised that the decision by the Prime Minister, Mr Blair, to establish a new inquiry was both a brave and historic political act. It has the potential to contribute to the healing so necessary between the peoples of the two islands.

In that bigger picture, and given their experience at Widgery, a squabble by the Saville Inquiry over the minimum but adequate legal team engaged by the Bloody Sunday families and wounded seems an insensitive ignominy to visit upon people of such recognised dignity.

Don Mullan is the author of the best-selling book Eyewitness Bloody Sunday (Wolfhound Press 1997), recognised as being the catalyst for the opening up the new Bloody Sunday inquiry. He is currently engaged as part of Madden and Finucane's legal team as an adviser, press secretary and assistant.