Relatives of the 14 men shot dead and the 13 civilians wounded by British soldiers in Derry on Bloody Sunday said yesterday they were disappointed at their failure to have the soldiers who opened fire in the Bogside in January 1972 named at the tribunal.
The Appeal Court in London yesterday ruled that 17 soldiers, most of them former members of the Parachute Regiment, should be granted anonymity when giving evidence to the Bloody Sunday Inquiry Tribunal.
The inquiry's chairman, Lord Saville of Newdigate, had sought to have the soldiers named when giving evidence. However, the Master of the Rolls, Lord Woolf, in a ruling handed down by three senior judges, said they did "not consider that any decision was possible other than to grant anonymity to the soldiers". It is believed that the soldiers will be identified by a letter when they give evidence to the inquiry, due to start its oral hearing in Derry's Guildhall in March.
However, it is believed that the 17 soldiers who successfully applied for anonymity will not be allowed to give evidence behind a screen.
Describing yesterday's ruling as a "setback", the families said they were still determined to participate in the tribunal.
Mr John Kelly, whose brother, Michael, was shot dead on Bloody Sunday, said despite their "bitter disappointment" the families would continue to take part in the tribunal.
"Basically, the issue of anonymity was a side issue, although an important one, and we will continue on. We believe the independence of the inquiry has been undermined by this ruling because it has clouded the openness and transparency of the inquiry.
"We have been fighting for 27 years for this inquiry. This is a setback . . ."
He said they knew the names of the soldiers who killed their loved ones. He knew the name of the soldier who killed his brother. "There is neither a danger nor a threat to the soldiers. We don't want them harmed. We want them to be a part of the inquiry."
He said none of the soldiers who killed people on Bloody Sunday had been harmed.
Mr Michael Bridge, who was shot in the leg on Bloody Sunday, said the Appeal Court's ruling dismayed him. "One of the soldiers who could be giving evidence may be the soldier who shot me. Quite simply, I want him to justify what he did. When I attend the inquiry I will be labelled as a terrorist because that was his reason for shooting me.
"I want him to justify that, I want him to clarify it, I want him to prove it. You can't prove the unprovable, so I want him to be put in a position to address any accusations he makes against me.
"When he shot me he represented the law and he told the law that I was a terrorist. If he is innocent, why does he want to hide behind a coat of anonymity?"
Mr Peter Madden, solicitor for several of the victims' families, said the families would meet their legal representatives to consider the implications of the ruling. "The road has ended as far as anonymity is concerned because the tribunal is not going to appeal against it. The fairness of an English judiciary is now in direct conflict with an international tribunal's standard of fairness."
Mr Des Doherty, solicitor for the family of victim Bernard McGuigan, said the decision in favour of the soldiers went against the openness of a public inquiry. "It will in some sense make a farce of the inquiry because the soldiers will give their evidence through the guise of a letter. For the last 27 years all the McGuigan family have known is that their father was killed by a letter of the alphabet.
"This is not a criminal trial but it flies in the face of logic to have the soldiers coming to a public inquiry and not giving their names. There is no risk to the soldiers. I would point out that all of the families, particularly the McGuigan family, do not want vengeance. They do not want any harm to come to the soldiers in any way whatsoever. They simply want the truth about Bloody Sunday to come out."