The long-awaited Saville report into the British army killings on Bloody Sunday in Derry in 1972 has been approved by the three members of the tribunal.
However, the Northern Secretary Shaun Woodward says it may not be released until after the British general election.
Mr Woodward said in a statement to the Commons that British government lawyers will this week begin legal checks of the 5,000-page document for potential national and personal security issues.
He added that arrangements have been made for Mr Saville, who led the public inquiry into how 14 people were killed by British troops to retain the report if a publication date cannot be secured before an election is called.
While bereaved relatives want an early publication of the report, which took 12 years to compile and cost £200m, Mr Woodward said he was legally obliged to have the checks carried out.
Mr Woodward added that once the checking process is complete, a publication date can be set and the report can be printed.
‘It is, of course, possible that a general election might be called in the meantime. Lord Saville has informed me that if it becomes clear that it will not be possible for the report to be published in advance of the dissolution of Parliament, the tribunal will agree to retain custody of the report until after the general election’, he said.
Mr Woodward said relatives of the bereaved and injured, plus soldiers involved in the inquiry, would be offered early access to the report on the day of its eventual release.
‘Publication of the report of the Bloody Sunday Inquiry has been long-awaited and it promises to be a hugely significant event in Northern Ireland's history,’ he said.
‘But this is also an occasion that will have an enormous impact on the private lives of ordinary people.
‘I am determined to ensure that arrangements for publication are fair and reasonable, and at all times I intend to act reasonably in recognition of the interests of the families, soldiers and others involved in the inquiry, and of my obligations to Parliament.’
After the bereaved families expressed concerns that the report would be handed to government to allow it to carry out the legal checks, Mr Woodward confirmed that while the text is being review, the report will remain under the control of Lord Saville, while Counsel to the Inquiry will be present during the checks.
Mr Woodward said he wanted to publish the report in full, but said he would remove extracts where advised necessary to ensure the safety of individuals.
He added: ‘The report must be published first for this House, but I acknowledge the importance of this inquiry's findings in the lives of a large number of individuals and I have received the consent of the Speaker to facilitate a period of advance sight on the day of publication to those most directly affected by the report's contents.’
Mr Saville's inquiry was set up in 1998 to re-examine the events of January 1972, when soldiers from the Parachute Regiment opened fire on civil rights demonstrators in the Bogside area of Derry.
It was established after the original Widgery Inquiry in the wake of the killings was dismissed by the families as a whitewash.
Mr Woodward said: ‘I will seek to offer advance sight on the day of publication to one representative of each of the families designated as full interested parties to the inquiry and to their legal representatives, without distinction between the families of those killed and of those wounded. Equal arrangements for advance sight will be offered to those soldiers most centrally involved in the subject matter of the inquiry.’
The SDLP was critical of the Mr Woodward's announcement.
Foyle MP Mark Durkan said the statement confirms that both British government and Lord Saville have acceded to the request from the Bloody Sunday families that the report remains under Lord Saville's guardianship until the day of actual publication.
‘He also puts on public record suggestions that he has made to offer controlled reading to family representatives and their lawyers, and similarly in respect of the soldiers involved, on the day of publication.
‘It has to be recognised that the families still resent and reject the idea that British government officials should have a prior, long access to the report as opposed to the few hours being accorded to them.
‘It is also not particularly fair or sensitive to insist that each family should select a single member to go into the controlled reading arrangement,’ Mr Durkan said.
