UDA-linked fund heads for courts

The UDA failed to meet Margaret Ritchie's 60-day ultimatum

A High Court challenge has been launched over the controversial withdrawal of £1.2m from a UDA-linked conflict transformation scheme.

Social Development Minister Margaret Ritchie halted the funding last month after the UDA failed to meet her 60-day ultimatum for it to give up its guns.

The case is being brought by an employee of Farset, the independent body appointed to oversee the project.

The judge said monthly £25,000 funding should continue until the case's end.

Gerald Solinas, 28, and 13 colleagues had faced the sack on Friday until the temporary funding was granted.

It seems to me there is an arguable case she made the decision herself without referring it to the executive Mr Justice Weatherup

Ms Ritchie last month insisted there was a link between the UDA and the Conflict Transformation Initiative.

She said she was withdrawing the funding because the UDA's failure to decommission weapons was a breach of the project's contract.

Lawyers for Mr Solinas claimed the minister had wrongly taken irrelevant information into account - the UDA's failure to make a start to destroying its guns or to conduct a meaningful engagement with General John de Chastelain's Decommissioning Commission.

'False piety'

His barrister said Mr Solinas stood to lose his job through no fault of his own because of Ms Ritchie's decision, which he described as being "long on unction and false piety but short of the requisite legality".

He said the minister had ignored the clear legal obligation which bound her.

Ms Ritchie's barrister said she had been tempted to stop the funding immediately as the UDA had not kept its part of the bargain to get off the backs of the loyalist community but instead had deferred a decision for 60 days.

She had set the ultimatum following a number of violent incidents involving UDA members in the summer months.

Granting leave for a judicial review, Mr Justice Weatherup referred to the challenge to the minister's authority to make the decision on her own.

He said: "It seems to me there is an arguable case she made the decision herself without referring it to the executive."

The case was adjourned until 18 February, and two days have been set aside for the hearing.