It’s regrettable that the UK Supreme Court cannot go further. After all, its distinguished members concluded:
One of the majority Justices, Lord Kerr, described the case as “shocking” adding that the “overwhelming preponderance of currently available evidence” showed:
“wholly innocent men were mercilessly murdered and the failure of the authorities of this state to conduct an effective inquiry into their deaths” (para 204).
Another, Lord Neuberger, commented “the evidence which first came to light in late 1969 and early 1970 plainly suggested that the Killings were unlawful” (para 75) and “a war crime may have been committed” (para 136).
Lord Kerr’s judgment concluded by expressing regret at the majority’s decision. He added (para 285):
“the law has proved itself unable to respond positively to the demand that there be redress for the historical wrong that the appellants so passionately believe has been perpetrated on them and their relatives. That may reflect a deficiency in our system of law. It certainly does not represent any discredit on the honourable crusade that the appellants have pursued.”