Publication date:
An internal review of the Public Prosecution Service’s (PPS) decisions not to prosecute eight former soldiers in relation to allegations of giving false evidence relating to the events of Bloody Sunday has resulted in those decisions being upheld.
The PPS has today (Wednesday 28 January 2026) communicated this outcome to the families of Bloody Sunday victims who requested formal reviews of decisions not to prosecute for potential offences of perjury or perverting the course of justice. These potential offences arose from allegations that the suspects deliberately provided false evidence to the Bloody Sunday Inquiry or in formal accounts provided in 1972.
In April 2024, after careful consideration of all available evidence, decisions were taken not to prosecute 16 individuals because of insufficient admissible evidence to provide a reasonable prospect of conviction.
The PPS subsequently received a request on behalf of the families of eight victims to review the decisions taken in relation to former soldiers known as Soldiers F, H, J, M, P, S, U and V.
In line with the review process set out by the PPS Code for Prosecutors, the reviewing lawyer applied the Test for Prosecution afresh to the large volume of complex evidence and information considered by the original PPS decision-maker in order to reach new decisions. Detailed legal submissions received on behalf of the families were also considered in the course of the reviews.
The review reached a similar conclusion to the original decision. A key aspect of the reasoning was that much of the evidence that was relied upon by the Bloody Sunday Inquiry, including in particular key accounts provided by soldiers in 1972, would not be admissible in any prosecution of the soldiers for perjury or perverting the course of justice. This was because they had been obtained in circumstances that had been found by previous courts to amount to oppression and in which fundamental legal safeguards had been denied to the soldiers. The admission of such accounts, even to prove that they were untrue, would likely be considered by a court to be unfair.
The prosecution’s position was not altered by the comments made by the Trial Judge in relation to one of the soldiers when acquitting Soldier F of charges of murder and attempted murder. Those findings relied upon evidence that had been admitted for a different purpose in the context of that particular trial, but which would not be admissible against the soldier concerned if he were to be prosecuted.
A PPS spokesperson said: “The review of this legally complex matter is now complete. After a careful analysis of all available evidence and the legal submissions made by the family legal representatives, it has been concluded that the evidential threshold to proceed with a prosecution has not been met.
“The standard of proof required to obtain a conviction in a criminal prosecution is high. The prosecution must establish beyond a reasonable doubt the commission of a criminal offence by an identified individual. Prosecutors must make an independent assessment of the prospects of conviction based upon the evidence that would be admissible in criminal proceedings.
“It is recognised that this outcome does not reflect the hopes and expectations of the Bloody Sunday families, and that it will come as another deeply disappointing day after decades of seeking justice for their loved ones. A detailed written explanation has been provided to the families to assist them in understanding our decision.
“We would further emphasise that today’s decisions in no way diminish the findings by the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. A public inquiry and a criminal trial are very different processes and much of the material upon which the Inquiry could rely would not be available to the prosecution having regard to the rules of evidence that apply to criminal proceedings.”
ENDS
NOTES TO EDITORS:
- All decisions by the PPS are taken strictly in accordance with the Test for Prosecution which involves two stages. The Test for Prosecution is met if, in relation to an identifiable suspect, the available evidence is sufficient to provide a reasonable prospect of a conviction (the Evidential Test) and if prosecution is in the public interest (the Public Interest Test).
- The Evidential Test must be passed first before the Public Interest Test is considered. Further information can be found in the PPS Code for Prosecutors.
- The PPS review process is also set out in full by the Code for Prosecutors. Further information on the process and parameters can be found by visiting our website.
- In 2016, the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) submitted an investigation file to the PPS in relation to allegations of murder and attempted murder on Bloody Sunday.
- On the 14th March 2019, the PPS announced its intention to prosecute one former soldier, known as Soldier F, in relation to events on Bloody Sunday on charges of murder and attempted murders. Soldier F was acquitted of all charges on 23rd October 2025.
- Also on the 14th March 2019, the PPS issued decisions not to prosecute 18 other suspects reported in connection with events on Bloody Sunday, including 16 former soldiers and two alleged Official IRA members.
- On 19th April 2024, the PPS issued decisions not to prosecute 16 individuals in relation to allegations of false evidence relating to the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. These included15 former soldiers and one former alleged member of the Official IRA.
- A request for a review of the decision not to prosecute eight former soldiers in relation to the April 2024 decisions was received in May 2024 from legal representatives of eight victims of Bloody Sunday. Written submissions in support of the request for review were received in September 2024.
- More information on the Bloody Sunday Inquiry can be found on the UK government website Bloody Sunday Inquiry.
- Media queries for the PPS should be referred to the Communications Unit by emailing ppspressoffice@ppsni.gov.uk
inside office hours. The out of hours press officer can be contacted on 07920 271 804.