Compensation for victims of Libyan-sponsored IRA terrorism

Approximate read time: 12 minutes

On 1 May 2025, the House of Lords is scheduled to debate the following motion:

Baroness Hoey (Non-affiliated) to ask His Majesty’s Government whether they will consider using frozen Libyan assets to provide compensation to victims of IRA terrorism.

1.  Background: Gaddafi’s support for the Provisional IRA

From the 1970s to the 1990s, former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi’s (sources use the spelling Gaddafi, Qaddafi or Qadhafi) regime provided support for the Provisional IRA.^[1] Support included arms and ammunition, millions of dollars in finance, military training and explosives. It included several shipments of Semtex, a highly powerful, malleable and almost undetectable plastic explosive. The House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee called the supply of Semtex “particularly devastating” and said it had facilitated a deadly bombing campaign:^[2]

• On 8 November 1987, a Provisional IRA bomb using Semtex killed 11 people during a Remembrance Sunday ceremony in Enniskillen.
• On 10 April 1992, a 45kg bomb using Semtex detonated outside the Baltic Exchange in the City of London killing three people and injuring more than 90 others.
• On 20 March 1993, a bomb detonated in Warrington, resulting in the death of two children.
• On 9 February 1996, the Provisional IRA broke its ceasefire when it detonated a bomb in the Docklands area of London. Two people were killed and many more were injured.

The committee heard from witnesses about the human consequences of the Gaddafi regime’s support for the Provisional IRA. It found that the support had “the effect of extending and exacerbating ‘the Troubles’ in Northern Ireland, causing untold human suffering”.^[3]

2.  Calls for compensation

For a number of years, victims of the Provisional IRA’s attacks and their families, as well as other stakeholders, have campaigned for financial support and compensation. This has included calls for the government to engage in direct negotiations with the Libyan authorities to secure an agreement and to use Libyan assets frozen in 2011 to compensate victims.

2.1 House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee

The House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee ran an inquiry in 2015 on the role of the UK government in seeking compensation for UK victims of Libyan sponsored Provisional IRA attacks. The committee published its initial report in 2017 and a follow up report in 2019.^[4]

The committee found that the survivors and families of the victims of the attacks had received limited support from the UK government.^[5] It said that whilst many victims may have been eligible for a payment from either the Compensation Agency in Northern Ireland or the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, many were not aware of their eligibility. It also said that the amounts distributed were “modest”, with claims having to be made within two years of the incident. The committee also argued that victims in Great Britain had struggled to access some support because health and welfare services were traditionally not as tailored towards victims of terrorism as they had been in Northern Ireland.

The committee highlighted that victims of similar attacks in other countries have been compensated through government-led negotiations.^[6] For example, in 2008 the US government agreed a compensation package with the Libyan government for US victims of Gaddafi-sponsored terrorism. The French and German governments have also secured compensation from the Libyan government for their citizens.

In both its reports the committee called on the then government to begin direct negotiations with the Libyan government to agree a compensation package for UK victims. In 2017, the committee said that whilst there were almost £9.5bn of frozen Libyan assets in the UK, it believed it was preferable for the Libyan authorities to voluntarily agree to a compensation package.^[7] However, it argued that time was running out for the victims, many of whom it said needed urgent support. The committee therefore recommended that if by the end of 2017 it was apparent that direct negotiations on compensation were not possible in the short to medium term then the UK should itself establish and finance a reparations fund.

In its follow-up report in 2019, the committee had expressed disappointment about the government’s “continued inaction”.^[8] It said that the government’s position that it was not responsible for securing compensation for victims and that they should pursue cases with the Libyan authorities individually was “untenable”. The committee also argued that the government’s position ignored the “reality of the current political situation in Libya, with its chaotic and unstable governance arrangements”. Stating that time had already run out for many victims, the committee said the government “must now enter into direct negotiations with the Libyan authorities to seek a compensation deal as soon as possible”.

On the issue of frozen Libyan assets, the committee said that the government should release clear information on the taxable status of, and taxes collected from, Libya’s frozen assets.^[9] It argued the government should outline whether a case had been considered for compensating victims from this. The committee also said that information on licences issued for accessing frozen Libyan assets should be made publicly available, and the House of Commons notified when such licences are issued. In addition, it argued that the government should carefully consider decisions to issue licences in the future when linked to compensation for victims.

2.2 Private member’s bills

Lord Empey (Ulster Unionist) has introduced several private member’s bills on the issue. In the 2016–17 parliamentary session he introduced the Asset Freezing (Compensation) Bill which he said was the “brainchild of the all-party support group for the UK victims of Libyan-IRA terrorism”.^[10] He argued that the bill was an attempt to provide the government with the “means to right the wrong that has been done to the many victims of Gaddafi-sponsored terrorism”.^[11]

Responding for the then Conservative government, Viscount Younger of Leckie argued that the powers that would be granted by the bill would put the UK in breach of its obligations under UN security council resolutions, EU sanctions regulations and the European Convention on Human Rights.^[12] Lord Younger also said that compensation claims are “private matters that are best pursued directly with the Libyan authorities”.^[13]

The bill completed its Lords stages, but did not progress beyond first reading in the House of Commons. Lord Empey introduced a similar bill in the 2017–19 parliamentary session which also did not progress beyond first reading in the House of Commons.^[14]

3.  Previous government policy

3.1  Overview

Since 2015, successive Conservative governments have said that it is the responsibility of the Libyan government to provide compensation to UK victims of Libyan-sponsored IRA terrorism and for that reason it would not fund a scheme using public finances.^[15] They have also said that under international law they cannot use Libyan assets frozen in 2011 to fund compensation (as explained by Lord Younger in response to Lord Empey’s private member’s bill (see section 2.2)).

In 2018, Alistair Burt, then minister of state for the Middle East and North Africa, provided more information on the government’s stance in a letter to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee:

Libya is considered to be a third party in Qadhafi-sponsored IRA terrorism, providing support to the Provisional IRA but not itself directing or carrying out the attacks. While this in no way diminishes the suffering caused, it makes establishing a causal link more challenging. There is no precedent for the government espousing victims’ claims against a state alleged to have sponsored a terrorist group’s activity.^[16]

The House of Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee has argued that the government’s position is “in contrast to the policies” of the countries who have secured compensation.^[17]

In 2021, the then government said it had repeatedly urged the Libyan authorities, including at the highest level of the Libyan government, to engage with UK victims and their representatives to address their claims for compensation.^[18] It said it would continue to do so.

3.2 Shawcross report

In March 2019, William Shawcross was appointed special representative on UK victims of Gaddafi-sponsored IRA terrorism.^[19] A government press release said that the appointment followed discussions with parliamentarians about how the UK government could best support and facilitate the efforts of victims to obtain redress from the Libyan government. It said that Mr Shawcross’s role would be to help inform the government’s approach, including advice on the amount of compensation that should be sought.

As part of his role, the then government commissioned Mr Shawcross to write an internal scoping report on the subject of compensation for UK victims of Gaddafi-sponsored IRA terrorism. Mr Shawcross submitted his report to the government in March 2020. In March 2021, in a statement to the House of Commons, James Cleverly, then minister of state for the Middle East and North Africa, said that the government would not be releasing the Shawcross report.^[20] He said that after reflecting on Mr Shawcross’ report, the government’s view was that “an additional, UK-funded mechanism for providing compensation to victims of the Troubles would not provide accountability for the specific role of the Qadhafi regime”. He also reiterated that the UK is unable to fund compensation through use of frozen Libyan assets:

[…] regrettably, the UK has no legal basis to seize frozen Libyan assets or to refuse the release of frozen assets. The government cannot lawfully use Libyan assets frozen in the UK to provide compensation to victims.^[21]

In response, Mr Shawcross said that he understood from the beginning that his report would not be published but said he was “surprised and disappointed” by the government’s statement.^[22] He said that he had made three recommendations to the government in his report but could not say what they were.

3.2  Reaction to the government’s position

Campaigners, including those injured or who lost family members in the bombings, have criticised both the government’s refusal to publish the Shawcross report and its position on compensation. For example, Kenny Donaldson of Innocent Victims United, an umbrella group of 24 groups, said that:

[…] for two years the UK government has been responsible for heaping further pain upon those already treated so shamefully. The Shawcross report can’t even be described as a ‘whitewash’ because it continues to be held back from victims.^[23]

Barry O’Donnell, a solicitor who represented some of the victims, said that Mr Cleverly’s statement was “another piece of political choreography designed to undermine the authority of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee and to frustrate the hopes and expectations of the victims and survivors of Gaddafi-Libyan sponsored IRA terrorism”.^[24]

The Docklands Victims Association (DVA), another group frustrated with the government’s actions, responded by publishing its own document outlining findings and recommendations based on its own 15-year campaign.^[25] President of the DVA, Jonathan Ganesh, who was injured in the Docklands bombing, described the government’s approach to compensation as “absurd and disingenuous”.

4.  Current government position

In October 2024, the government was asked a parliamentary written question about whether it had held recent discussions with Libyan counterparts on providing compensation to victims of Libyan-sponsored IRA terrorism and their families.^[26] Responding, Hamish Falconer, the parliamentary under-secretary of state for the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan, said:

The UK government reiterates its sympathy for UK victims of Qaddafi-sponsored terrorism, and indeed all victims of the Troubles. The UK’s position with regards to victims of Libyan-sponsored IRA terrorism is that it is the responsibility of the Libyan government to provide compensation. The UK government cannot lawfully use frozen Libyan assets to provide compensation to victims as doing so would break international law and our obligations as members of the UN. We will continue to call for Libyan authorities to address the Libyan State’s historic responsibility for the Qaddafi regime’s support for the IRA.^[27]

This response represents a continuation of the previous government’s policy.

---

Cover image by Deposit Photos.