Veterans fear a new witch-hunt of Northern Ireland soldiers after Labour set out plans to repeal legal protections which could see former service personnel subjected to “two tier” justice. The Prime Minister vowed in his election manifesto to amend the Legacy Act, introduced by the Conservative government in an attempt to draw a line under troubles, over concerns that it breaches the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The act shut down all historical inquests and prevented new civil cases from being brought against soldiers who served in the country between 1969 and 1998.

However, it has now emerged that a campaign group representing eight members of the IRA killed by the SAS in 1987 at Loughgall, said it had received an “unequivocal commitment” from Hilary Benn, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland that an inquest into the incident will happen. It raises the possibility that criminal action could follow the inquest if it finds an unlawful killing verdict as well as civil action against the soldiers.

David Johnstone, the Northern Ireland Veterans Commissioner, blasted the decision, labelling it as “a deliberate strategy to blame state forces and justify the terror brought on communities”.

He said: “This pursuit is imbalanced; it is not fair that there is no scrutiny on terrorists who were responsible for more than 90% of deaths in the troubles.

“Nobody should be afraid of justice. But we have a two-tier justice system that only puts veterans and security forces in the dock.

“This is simply the republicans next phase of their struggle using every means possible to clog up the legal system. Repealing the Legacy Act could put 80-100 veterans in the dock or at risk from prosecution from the 33 inquests. That is not to mention the 500 civil cases ongoing all against the state.”

Mr Johnstone said that nobody is asking for soldiers to be allowed to act outside of the law but added: “This is immoral to subject British troops to this. Why would any man or woman want to join the forces if 50 years later actions are scrutinised?

“Nobody is above the law, no soldier who wore the uniform is above the law, they should be held accountable. But this gets to the heart of the matter, which law? Rules of engagement for soldiers were given.

“The very concept that a civilian coroner is going to second guess the decisions of soldiers in combat is preposterous. ECHR is not the law the soldiers were asked to adhere to when they went on the ground.”

Shadow Defence Secretary James Cartlidge also questioned the impact of veterans facing the threat of prosecution on serving soldiers.

He told the Daily Express: “What impact will this news have on the morale of those soldiers who may be sent to Ukraine for peacekeeping, when those who were peacekeeping in Northern Ireland are still being hounded today?

“This underlines why I’ve also called on the Government to derogate from the ECHR for the duration of any operation in Ukraine, so that we reduce the risk of vexatious action against our personnel, should they be deployed there.”

Paul Young, of the Northern Ireland Veterans’ Movement, said he did not think former service personnel would be treated fairly by the legal system.

He said: “I don’t believe that veterans are able to get a fair trial within a Northern Ireland justice system that is dominated by Republicans.

“There is a huge disparity which is why we are totally against what is happening. Terrorists are given effective immunity with comfort letters and veterans are being hounded through the courts.

“If I could speak to Keir Starmer, I would tell him to leave the legacy act alone. You can’t apply Article 2 of the ECHR to incidents that happened decades before they were written.”

Under the Good Friday Agreement, people in prison for violent offences linked to the troubles were released in exchange for Republican groups giving up their arms. Hundreds of IRA members on the run at the time of the agreement were given “comfort letters” by the British government which essentially protected them from prosecution for their crimes, including murders, on their return to the UK.

The killing of eight members of the IRA at Loughgall remains one of the most controversial incidents of the Troubles. The incident in May 1987 saw eight members of the IRA killed in a pre-planned ambush by the SAS as they launched an attack with assault weapons and a bomb against a police station.

An inquest into the deaths of the IRA men and one civilian who was fatally wounded in the incident was unable to conclude prior to the introduction of the Legacy Act.

Darragh Mackin, solicitor for the families, said: “The families have today been informed that the Loughgall case will return as part of his commitment to the reviving of those legacy inquests which were prematurely halted.”

Jon Trigg, a former British Army Officer and author of the book ‘Death in the Fields: The IRA and East Tyrone’, told the Bel Tel podcast how previous attempts to peacefully arrest suspects had placed soldiers in harm’s way.

He said: “There was a famous incident where soldiers saw two men coming towards them in combats and weren’t sure who they were, one of them called out ‘hello’ even though it was an out of bounds area and the men opened fire and killed one of them.

“That was a salutary, particularly to the individuals from the SAS and everybody else in the British Army that you don’t take a chance because if you take a chance, you could end up dead.”

Falklands war veteran Michael Hawkes, 65, who served in the SAS for 13 years and deployed to Northern Ireland on several occasions, said that he sleeps easily at night knowing that bad people “are no longer this earth”.

He said: “It is frustrating to hear IRA complaints and demands for investigations.

“To claim that there was a shoot to kill policy is such a farce. The British Military were sent there to do a job not to kill but to respond to terrorist activity.”

Mr Hawkes is one of thousands of former soldiers, many of whom are now elderly men, who live in the knowledge that their actions half a century ago could end up being scrutinised by lawyers with little understandings of the reality of operating in a hostile environment.

He added: “Absolutely people fear being prosecuted and it is a shame because it puts people at my age and older looking over their shoulder thinking we went out there to save lives and make Northern Ireland a better place and we are faced with this decades later.”

The ongoing legal pursuit of veterans through the courts for their time spent in a dangerous theatre maintaining the peace, holds striking parallels with a potential deployment in a peace-keeping capacity in Ukraine.

The government’s simultaneous planning for the deployment of troops whilst repealing legislation designed to protect soldiers from being punished for their service angers veterans who question why troops should put themselves in a dangerous position.

Mr Hawkes said: “Why should British soldiers go to war for an organisation that chases them through the courts in old age?

“These lads put themselves at huge risk to protect the general public but what is stopping greedy lawyers chasing them years down the line?

My Young highlighted the case of Dennis Hutchings, 80, who was on trial in Belfast for murder and grievous bodily harm over a 1974 shooting at a checkpoint, when he died of heart failure and fluid on the lung in 2021.

Mr Hutchings, who served with the Household Cavalry, had been forced to fight kidney disease and the justice system simultaneously prior to his death, something Mr Young described as “a disgrace”.

He added: “We were both in the Household Cavalry and I was there every day of his trail. What he had to go through at the end of his life was a disgrace.”

A Conservative source told the Daily Express that they plan to fight Labour’s attempt to amend the act and open veterans up to criminal and civil prosecution.

They said: “It is totally unacceptable and grossly unfair, not least as under Labour's plans, Gerry Adams will be able to sue the British taxpayer for compensation!

“We are now fighting these proposals in Parliament and have already met with various Veterans groups from a number of different Regiments, particularly in terms of how we can support their plans for a public petition to highlight to this Government just how ill-thought through their plans are.

“The knock-on effects in terms of Armed Forces recruitment and retention will also be considerable, as it is clear that the Government “doesn’t have their back” and that human rights activism remains the priority for Starmer and Co.”