Representing Victims of Terrorism in South Armagh
living memorial centre
stories of south armagh
latest news
true story



The name of the ‘Victims Unit’, part of OFMDFM, is a misnomer in the worst sense of the word. This taskforce is supposedly in place to provide for and protect the needs of victims of conflict, yet they have consistently insulted the memories of thousands in Northern Ireland.

The bias of these Stormont mandarins is clear for all to see in the response to a proposal made by FAIR for a permanent memorial centre and base of operations for supporting victims and their families. This response has been outlined below with comments from FAIR Director William Frazer.

It is sad that those who made this decision are obeying orders from those, to whom the victims voice is a thorn in the side. If victims would simply lie down and be silent, the process of appeasement to terrorists could continue at a more rapid pace with no grieving families to prick the conscience.

The panel focused on the requirement that all groups funded under PEACE II demonstrate how they will ‘pave the way to reconciliation’. The following concerns were identified vis-à-vis the applicant’s response to question 7 on reconciliation:

1. It was of a general nature (in terms of the first paragraph)

The application specifically addressed how the project would would aid reconciliation. We argue that this statement is completly unsubstantiated and untrue.

2. It was a permissive rather than proactive

Again we feel this is untrue. The project actively addressed the main concerns of the victims we represent. FAIR makes no apologies for refusing to 'railroad' our members into situations where they feel marginalised and uncomfortable. Our project is proactive - but at a pace set by the victims - not enforced by the Governments timetable.

3. There was a lack of clear actions which would have a demonstrably conciliatory effect -It was thus agreed that the projects commitment to reconciliation was very weak.

This application was carefully prepared by experts in funding to suit the needs and issues of FAIR's membership. It was also reviewed by persons with experience of assessing PEACE applications who felt the application was strong with significant merits in terms of reconciliatory outcomes. We fail to see how the panel can have made this statement in the face of these opinions unless they are blatantly trying to undermine our work.


The panel was clear that it focused on the project as submitted, rather than any other information about FAIR in the public domain. It also recognised that the fact that FAIR was a ‘single identity’ organisation did not in itself vitiate its application, but it did have to demonstrate that the project would progress towards cross community relationships.

Once more FAIR make no apologies for the make up of our membership. The fact that the vast majority of victims in South Armagh were Protestant is undisputable. The fact that the majority, although not all, of our membership are Protestant is irrelevant to this application and we fail to see why this has been raised at all. As for 'progress towards cross community relationships', surely assisting families to grieve, rebuild their lives and gain justice will allow them to build confidence, move on and re-engauge into society and interact in a cross-community capacity.

There was concern in the regard that the project was focused on memorialising ‘innocent’ victims of terrorism rather than assisting an environment in which all victims could be become survivors, without denying the reality of their suffering.

The notion that terrorists killed in the process of planning and commiting evil acts are victims is offensive to all decent people. We will never accept this degrading and devalueing concept. We also will not accept the fact that those perpetrators of violence are simply 'victims of circumstances'. FAIR have the support of many politicians from across the political spectrum on this matter, and again we feel that this stance has been used to discriminate against us.


Example Of The Continuing Discrimination faced by FAIR: FAIR spent a week preparing an application and were turned down. Unbeknown to the funders we also completed another similar application on behalf of another victims group within two hours. Their's was passed. When we asked the funders why one succeeded and the other failed they told us the other was better at completing their application - this is the type of discrimination we face.

Back to Latest News