Gerry Adams begins giving evidence in London civil case over IRA bombings

Former Sinn Féin leader denies IRA membership as claimants seek £1 damages and ruling on personal liability for 1973 and 1996 attacks

Gerry Adams, 77, took the stand at the Royal Courts of Justice after five days of claimant testimony. He strenuously denies allegations that he was directly responsible for injuries from IRA bombings in London and Manchester.

LONDON — Gerry Adams began giving evidence at the Royal Courts of Justice on Monday, denying he was directly responsible for injuries suffered in separate IRA bomb attacks in 1973 and 1996, according to statements in court.

The former Sinn Féin leader is being sued by three men who allege he was “directly responsible for and complicit in” the attacks because of a leadership role in the IRA at the time. They are seeking vindicatory damages of £1 and a ruling that he is personally liable.

Adams, who has always denied ever being a member of the IRA, strenuously rejects the claims. It is the first time a court has been asked to adjudicate on allegations that he was a member of the organization.

He entered the witness box shortly after 10:30 a.m., wished the judge and courtroom a “happy St Patrick’s Day,” and is the only witness being called by his defense, the court was told.

What is confirmed

Eleven witnesses for the claimants gave evidence over five days before Adams was called. The claimants argue it is “inconceivable” he was not involved in decisions to bomb targets in Britain because, they allege, he sat on the IRA’s Army Council, which had to authorize such attacks.

During the trial, Adams has been described by witnesses as the IRA’s “de facto leader” and “greatest strategic thinker,” according to submissions.

Adams, a former Louth TD and West Belfast MP, arrived at court wearing a sprig of shamrock. He is being questioned by his own legal team before expected cross-examination by Max Hill KC, a former Director of Public Prosecutions for England and Wales, who represents the claimants.

Official response

Adams denies IRA membership and any role in the bombings. His legal team argues the case should fail on two grounds.

• Limitation: They say the claims are time-barred by the three-year limit for initiating civil proceedings in England and Wales, calling the decades-long delay “exceptional” and “extraordinary.” The defense says the passage of time means many potential witnesses are now dead, relevant records have been lost, and memories have faded “beyond the point of reliability,” significantly prejudicing his defense.
• Evidential sufficiency: They argue the claimants’ case is built on hearsay and does not meet the “heavy burden of proof” required for allegations described by the claimants’ own solicitor as “the most serious imaginable.” The defense says none of the individuals involved in authorizing, planning, or carrying out the 1973 and 1996 attacks has testified, and there are no contemporaneous documents, forensic, or scientific evidence implicating Adams. They also note that “not a single page” of secret intelligence material referenced by witnesses has been disclosed in court.

The defense submission states the claimants bear the burden of proof and that Adams is not required to prove a negative.

Speaking outside court after the second day of the trial last week, Adams said the only thing he was guilty of “is being an Irish republican, is believing in an end to British rule.”

What is not yet known

It is not yet known how the court will rule on the limitation arguments or on the alleged evidential gaps. The timeline for a judgment has not been provided. The contents of any undisclosed intelligence reports referenced by witnesses have not been presented in open court.

Why it matters

The case is a rare attempt to establish personal civil liability for historic IRA attacks and marks the first time a court has been asked to adjudicate on claims that Adams was a member of the IRA — allegations he has consistently denied.

What happens next

Adams will continue giving evidence and face questioning from his legal team, followed by cross-examination by Max Hill KC, according to the court. As a civil action, the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities; in criminal cases, it is beyond a reasonable doubt.

Further hearings and a timetable for judgment were not provided.