The Public Prosecution Service has said there was “insufficient evidence” to support terrorism charges against Winston ‘Winkie’ Irvine and Robin Workman after they were convicted of firearms offences.
In a statement released on Sunday, the PPS was responding to media commentary and coverage of the case which it said contained “factual inaccuracies”.
Senior politicians from both nationalist and unionist parties have criticised the sentences.
A long-barrelled gun, two suspected pistols, several magazines and a large quantity of bullets were discovered inside a bag in the boot of Mr Irvine’s car when he was stopped by police in the Shankill district of Belfast in June 2022.
Belfast Crown Court was told that the cache was initially transported by Robin Workman (54) before being transferred to the vehicle of Irvine (49), a short time before the PSNI intervened.
Both men admitted the charges against them but, while Workman was given the minimum custodial sentence of five years, half of which is to be served in custody and half on licence, Irvine was handed 30 months, again to be evenly divided between periods in custody and on licence.
Judge Gordon Kerr KC noted that UVF paraphernalia was found in the homes of both defendants, but he said did not consider there was a terrorist link to the weapons that were seized.
The judge said last month that there were “exceptional circumstances” in Irvine’s case, namely his “work for peace and his charity work in the community”, handing down a sentence which was less than the statutory minimum of five years.
In the statement issued by the PPS on Sunday, state prosecutors said they were “satisfied” there was not enough admissible evidence to support a terror conviction in addition to the firearms offences against both men.
“Consideration was given to whether additional offences should be prosecuted. After careful consideration of all the evidence submitted by police, it was concluded that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute either defendant for any additional offence, including a terrorist offence, such as membership of a proscribed organisation,” the statement said.
“To prosecute for such an offence there needs to be admissible evidence upon which a court could be sure that a defendant is a member, and not merely an associate of members of a proscribed organisation, or a supporter of any such organisation.
“Statements in the media in relation to a defendant’s alleged position within a proscribed organisation do not constitute admissible evidence.
“The PPS is satisfied that the correct offences were prosecuted in this case. They properly reflected the criminality alleged and provided the court with adequate powers in terms of sentencing.”
It added both men entered guilty pleas on the day they were due to stand trial, and that no deal or agreement between Mr Irvine and Mr Workman preceded the change of plea.
The statement went on to say it was for the courts to decide whether the firearm offences and the finding of UVF paraphernalia in the homes of both men constituted an act of “terrorism”.
“In all cases which do not feature a specific terrorism charge it has always been open to sentencing courts to determine that the offending was terrorist in nature and to treat that as an aggravating feature.
“Therefore the prosecution does not have to involve a specific offence under terrorist legislation for the court to be able to find that there is a terrorist connection to the offending.”
The Director of Public Prosecutions is currently considering whether to refer the sentencing of the two men to the Court of Appeal for being “unduly lenient” - and has until June 17 to do so.
