Published Friday, 05 June 2009
Mr Justice McLaughlin stressed the alleged interference must be taken seriously as he refused a bail application by one of the men charged with murdering the Ulster Defence Association chief in October 2000.
Prosecutors claimed Jason Loughlin, 33, was an "enthusiastic volunteer" in the plot, offering to be one of the gunmen before being given a sledgehammer the killers planned to use to break into their victim's home.
Mr English, 40, was gunned down at his home on the Ballyduff estate just outside north Belfast during a violent feud with the rival Ulster Volunteer Force which claimed seven lives.
Eleven men have been charged in connection with the murder, based on so-called supergrass evidence supplied by Newtownabbey brothers David Stewart, 38, and 34-year-old Robert Stewart.
They have pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting in the shooting.
Loughlin, of Ballyvessey Park, New Mossley, Co Antrim denies any involvement in the killing.
The court was told he had gone to police voluntarily earlier this year after hearing his name was being linked to the inquiry.
His barrister, Barry Gibson, also claimed that the Stewart brothers had a personal grudge or vendetta against his client.
But opposing bail, the prosecution repeated concerns about alleged witness intimidation in the case.
It has been claimed that one suspect phoned a woman from prison and warning she had better provide a good statement.
A car belonging to the Stewarts was also attacked after alleged police agent Mark Haddock was charged with Mr English's murder, while the victim's widow was also said to have suffered intimidation.
Mr Justice McLaughlin said that, if accurate, the claims pointed to an attempt to interfere with the administration of justice.
"If any of that is true then no court can ignore it and no court can treat it lightly," the judge said.
"If true this is a direct challenge to the authority of the prosecution system and the justice system as a whole and must be taken seriously."
He added: "The balance clearly falls in favour of refusing bail, given the matter is so serious and given the blatant attempts, as reported in this court, to intimidate witnesses and interfere with the investigation process."