Jordan, Application for Judicial Review [2026] NIDiv 2 (29 April 2026)

Executive summary

The High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland considered Teresa Jordan’s application for leave to seek judicial review of a Public Prosecution Service no-prosecution decision concerning two police officers, M and Q. The judgment arises out of the inquest into the death of Pearse Jordan and focuses on allegations that the officers may have committed perverting the course of justice and/or perjury in connection with the inquest evidence and logbook entries.

Key points

• Applicant: Teresa Jordan, mother of Pearse Jordan; respondent: Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland.
• Challenge concerned a no-prosecution decision relating to police officers M and Q after a coroner found they may have committed perverting the course of justice and/or perjury.
• Background facts include the 1992 police shooting of Pearse Jordan and a later inquest in which the coroner addressed officer conduct and evidence handling.
• The source text shows the case was heard as an application for leave to apply for judicial review, with a rolled-up hearing and notice to M and Q, who did not participate.
• No sanctions, export-control, or national-security regulation is addressed directly, but the underlying facts involve police, military liaison, and suspected PIRA munitions activity.
• The judgment is relevant to prosecution accountability and evidential integrity in politically sensitive security cases.

Why it matters

This matters for sovereign-risk and national-security analysis because it tests how prosecutorial decisions are scrutinized where state security operations, terrorism-related intelligence, and disputed evidence intersect. It also signals the litigation risk around inquest-derived allegations of misconduct by officers in legacy conflict cases.

Implications

For compliance and litigation strategy, the case underscores the importance of preserving operational records, logbooks, and witness consistency in sensitive security matters, because evidential alterations can become the basis for judicial review of a no-prosecution decision. It also shows that legacy Northern Ireland cases involving terrorism-linked operations can generate prolonged exposure to review even decades after the underlying events.