A senior officer in the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) has stated that the judicial system in the province produces “perverse” rulings, attributing this to the disproportionate representation of Catholics within the court system.
Darren Ellis, a former PSNI detective, revealed that a high-ranking PSNI official advised him to “exercise caution” when interacting with solicitors, barristers, and judiciary members. This information emerged during proceedings at the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in London, where allegations suggest that the PSNI, among other forces, improperly surveilled two Northern Ireland journalists in an effort to uncover their confidential sources.
Ellis reported that he received this caution after agreeing to investigate the source behind leaked information relied upon by journalists Barry McCaffrey and Trevor Birney for a documentary exposing police failures in the investigations of the paramilitary murders of six innocent Catholics in Loughinisland, County Down. In an email presented in court, the PSNI officer suggested that the “prevalence of individuals from a Catholic background within the Northern Ireland Courts system” had resulted in “perverse decisions” within the criminal justice framework.
He noted that the senior officer highlighted political and religious tensions within the legal system and cautioned him due to the “disproportionate representation” of Roman Catholics in legal roles. Ellis cited the officer’s remarks regarding what he termed “perverse decision-making” influenced by this demographic in the Northern Ireland Courts system.
The court was also informed that Ellis had criticized the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, Declan Morgan, in an email after Morgan ruled that the PSNI had unlawfully obtained warrants for the arrest of the two journalists. He described the ruling as an “absolute outrage” that “beggars belief,” which led to him receiving a reprimand from a senior officer the following day. Under cross-examination, Ellis refrained from confirming whether his emails were appropriate, labeling them as legally privileged communications and expressing surprise at their disclosure in the tribunal. He acknowledged that if he were to write the email again, he might choose different language, but maintained that the situation warranted his original sentiments.
Ellis explained the inherent difficulties of his investigation, noting the conflict it would create between law enforcement and the journalism community, and he dismissed suggestions that he agreed with the PSNI officer’s claims about the judiciary’s decision-making. Ellis expressed that he had reservations about taking on the investigation, citing his lack of familiarity with the Northern Ireland community.
Additionally, Ellis raised concerns over MP Graham Morris being photographed with journalists Birney and McCaffrey after the image was shared on Twitter. He requested that Durham Police investigate alleged “criminal conduct” by Morris, though Durham Police ultimately found insufficient evidence to consider a crime.
In a separate email to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, Ellis criticized Birney and McCaffrey, alleging they operated in an environment where accountability was absent, allowing them to intimidate others. He characterized their behavior as a strategy to instill fear and protect corrupt practices. Ellis acknowledged that his perspective on the Northern Irish context would be contentious given his examination of journalistic materials.
During cross-examination, Stephen Toal KC, representing McCaffrey, questioned Ellis’s impartiality, highlighting his interactions with former PSNI officers who were part of a group with grievances against the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland (PONI). Ellis admitted to knowing about the association’s legal actions against PONI but rejected claims that his meetings with retired officers undermined his independence.
The court revealed that the PSNI had asked for Ellis to be removed from the investigation due to a loss of confidence in him, a detail that surfaced only after being leaked to the press. Jaffey, representing the journalists, argued that Ellis arrived at the investigation with pre-existing biases against the documentary and its creators.
Moreover, he emphasized that Ellis spent considerable time attempting to discipline the journalists’ legal team, indicating a potential personal vendetta against them. Jaffey invited the court to view Ellis’s assertions regarding the judiciary being influenced by religious biases as unsubstantiated, framing the statements as extreme opinions potentially rooted in personal grievances. He asserted that Ellis’s claims amounted to a dangerous form of bias that could jeopardize the integrity of the judicial process.
The tribunal continues its proceedings.