AN INQUIRY INTO the sectarian murder of Robert Hamill has found police officers who were in a Land Rover near the scene “did not condone or collude” with the attackers.

However, the report said that a number of “wrongful acts and omissions” by RUC officers obstructed the investigation into his murder in 1997.

These included the failure to properly search the home of a key suspect.

A sister of Robert Hamill said the failings highlighted in the report had “led to those who murdered our brother evading justice”.

Hamill (25), a Catholic, died after he was attacked in Portadown, Co Armagh in April 1997.

Hamill and a friend were beaten by loyalists as they walked along Portadown’s Market Street after a night out.

The father-of-three suffered serious head injuries and died 11 days after the attack.

No-one has ever been convicted Hamill’s murder.

The murder was the subject of a public inquiry into whether the actions of RUC officers had facilitated his death or obstructed the murder investigation.

In 2004 the then Northern Ireland secretary Paul Murphy announced the terms of reference for the inquiry into the death of Hamill.

The delay in the report of the public inquiry was caused by live legal proceedings, which concluded in 2024 when former police officer Robert Cecil Atkinson from Brownstown Road in Portadown was convicted of conspiring to pervert the course of justice.

The 290-page report followed an inquiry which cost approximately £33 million (€38.55 million).

The family of Robert Hamill with the inquiry report (Liam McBurney/PA)

Diane Hamill, a sister of Robert Hamill, said: “Although we have some reservations about aspects of this report, we as a family feel totally vindicated by the clear and unequivocal findings of the panel.

“It documents multiple and shocking wrongdoing, some of it delivered by state agencies.

“These failings have led to those who murdered our brother evading justice.”

Ms Hamill said the family was disappointed the inquiry “could not agree on the consequences of the police officers in the Land Rover failing to intervene while Robert was being attacked”.

She said: “We agree with the late chairman that these officers were guilty of a wrongful omission in failing to keep a watch on the junction where the assault was taking place.”

Ms Hamill continued: “I want to reiterate that the people who killed our brother were never fully held accountable due to the obstructive conduct of the state justice agencies.”

The report said: “We find that Robert Hamill had been assaulted before the Land Rover officers got out of their vehicle.

The Robert Hamill inquiry panel in 2009 (Paul Faith/PA) PA PA

“However, they were not aware of the assault and after they had got out of their vehicle, they attempted to restore order.

“They did not in any way condone or collude with attackers.”

The report did say that serving RUC officers were guilty of wrongful omissions, and that those omissions arose “both at the scene and during the initial investigation”.

It found that Atkinson was guilty of a “wrongful act” for making a telephone call to a suspect which resulted in that individual destroying or putting beyond the reach of police the clothes he had been wearing the night Mr Hamill was murdered.

The report pointed to a number of flaws in the subsequent murder investigation, particularly the way the investigation into how the telephone call by Atkinson to the suspect was handled.

The report said: “The failure to treat the tip-off allegation as part of the murder investigation was negligent.”

Other RUC flaws highlighted by the report included a failure of officers to carry out an initial debriefing both at the scene and immediately on return to the police station, “with multiple officers finishing their shifts or going on to other duties without recording what had happened”.

The report said: “This had a serious and significant impact on the murder investigation and these omissions were negligent.”

It said there was also a failure to “properly search the home of a key suspect on 10 May 1997 for signs of destroyed clothing or for all shoes that might have been worn”.

It said: “These omissions amounted to a lack of due diligence.”

The report said there was a failure to “properly develop the murder investigation in multiple ways after the arrest of six suspects in May 1997”.