Mr Robert Spink (Con) MP  for Castle Point put a Question on  WW1 Pardons  to the Minister Mr Ivor Caplin MP

BRITISH - IRISH

INTER - PARLIAMENTARY BODY

THIRTY- FIRST PLENARY CONFERENCE - 28 and 29 November 2005 - Delmahoy Hotel and Country Club, Edinburgh.

 Irish Independent -  Irish Times -  at the request of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl - Pardons issue raised by Irish members Senator Brian Hayes FG and Senator Paschal Mooney FF at the Edinburgh meeting of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

Pardons for Irish Soldiers in the First World War

Extract Minutes

The Co-Chairman (Rt Hon Paul Murphy MP): I plan to group questions 1 and 4 together since they are identical.

1. Senator Brian Hayes asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and Wales what plans he has for the granting of pardons to the 306 Irish soldiers who were executed during the First World War; and whether he will make a statement.

4. Senator Paschal Mooney asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and Wales whether he will make it his policy that a full pardon should be granted to those Irish soldiers who served during the First World War who were shot at dawn; and whether he will make a statement on the matter.

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and Wales (Rt Hon Peter Hain MP): With the permission of the Plenary, I would like to answer questions 1 and 4 together. I shall begin by clarifying a point on the numbers of Irish soldiers who were executed. I understand that 26 of the soldiers who were executed during the First World War were Irish: the figure 306 relates to the total number of soldiers who were executed for the offences for which pardons are sought, the great majority of whom were not Irish. As both Senators will know, the British Government are in regular contact with the Irish Government about this tricky question. We offered Irish officials the opportunity to review all of the relevant case files we hold to help them with the compilation of a detailed report, which they have now presented to us. We are keeping in touch with them about the progress we have made with our response. We will obviously want to discuss the contents of any formal response with them before we issue it. In the circumstances, therefore, I do not think it is appropriate for me to comment further on this matter today, although I am happy to deal with any supplementary questions.

Senator Brian Hayes: Does the Secretary of State recognise the apparent contradiction in the fact that his Government now want to offer an effective pardon to a group of people who have destabilised both Britain and Ireland over the past 40 years, while not yet having come to a definitive view on a pardon for a group of people whose only crime was to volunteer to fight for their country in the first world war? Does he agree that he and the British Government have a responsibility to resolve this issue to the satisfaction of the families concerned, and to restore the memory of these men, who, in appalling circumstances, had their lives taken away from them on spurious grounds and for spurious military offences? Will he further elaborate on a dossier, sent from the Irish Government to the British Government in October 2004, which cast very serious doubt cast on the safety of the convictions of the 26 Irish soldiers by military tribunals in the First World War, and which showed a clear disparity in the treatment of Irish soldiers and the lower ranks of the army? Does he also agree that that is one of the few issues that unite Catholic, Protestant, Unionist and Nationalist people North and South? Shame has been attached to the names of individuals who, under any set of circumstances today or in the 1920s, would not have been convicted for those crimes. His Government should now grant them a retrospective pardon.

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and Wales: I understand and sympathise with those sentiments, but may I correct the Member on one thing from the outset? If he was referring to the on-the-runs situation, we are not introducing pardons for anybody in Northern Ireland. This is a judicial process from which, if the evidence stacks up, people will emerge with a conviction and a sentence; but we can revisit that issue. A pardon  would mean that there would be no redress if the terms of the subsequently issued licence were broken. I agree that those soldiers executed in the First World War are recognised by our Government as victims of a terrible war, and that the stigma of executions needs to be lifted. As public recognition of that increases, it is important that those responsible have been asked to add the men’s names to the war memorials and books of remembrance throughout the country. Fittingly, those men are also commemorated in the National Memorial Arboretum. They are remembered alongside their fallen comrades, and the sacrifice of all those lives is honoured and acknowledged by all of us. I accept that we must still move forward to address the issues that Brian raised, but there is a common purpose on this.

Senator Paschal Mooney: I thank the Secretary of State for his reply. I appreciate the constraints under which he operates on this sensitive matter, but I am grateful to him for taking the question. What is striking about the question and the circumstances surrounding this short discussion is that there was a time when we would not have been able to discuss it. It is positive that both Governments are at one in attempting to resolve what is an extremely sensitive matter, even though it is over 90 years old. Interestingly, the report to which the Secretary of State refers — and perhaps he might comment on this — indicates that there was no religious bias behind the disparity in Irish condemnations. It happened across the board, but it was much higher in Irish regiments than, for example, in the New Zealand regiments. Will the Secretary of State also reflect on the fact that the New Zealand Government have granted pardons to their soldiers, which is their right as a dominion-status country? At least they have moved to resolve the issue. With your indulgence, Co-Chairman, and I am sure that the Secretary of State will join me, I want to compliment the Shot at Dawn (Ireland) Campaign co-ordinated by Mr Peter Mulvany, who has been lobbying both Governments for some years on this issue. I hope that it has reached a point at which, as the Secretary of State indicated, it is coming close to closure. If I may, for the benefit of those who are not familiar with the background to those cases, I have picked one at random: Private George Hanna from Belfast of 1 Battalion Royal Irish Fusiliers, who was executed in November 1917. Private Hanna had been charged with desertion and convicted on two previous occasions. After a third desertion his court martial was told he had not been home on leave for three years. That was three years in the trenches. In that time three of his brothers had died in the war. He had absented himself because he learned his sister was not well and he was upset because he was not able to see “his people”. The Report that the Secretary of State has referred to, compiled by the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs, said that his failure to get home in three years undoubtedly influenced his decision to try to get back to Belfast, and that there was no evidence the military hierarchy had thought twice about taking a fourth son from the family by executing Private Hanna. That is just one of many tragic stories surrounding the entire episode. I hope that after this length of time, and considering the general acknowledgment now in the Republic of Ireland of the sacrifices of Irish soldiers who contributed to the Allied campaign, there will be closure, finally, to a tragic episode, and dignity for those men and especially their families after 90 years.

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and Wales: The Member has put that very eloquently. I was in New Zealand on a ministerial visit on Remembrance Day last year. That issue was very live at the time, and I am aware of what was decided. I am very conscious, Co-Chairman, of the fact that these were teenagers, in many cases, in a terrible war. We are now looking back at it from nearly 100 years on, and we are, I think, all of the same mind that their treatment and the summary executions at that time just cannot be justified in modern, civilised, military terms as well as any other terms. So it is a question of moving forward when we are in a position to do so.

Mr Paul Flynn MP: I welcome those remarks. That was the warmest expression of sympathy for the campaign that I have heard from a Secretary of State. Andrew Mackinlay raised the matter in his first week as a Member of Parliament, and he has pursued it with consistency and dedication since then. Unfortunately the matter was rejected by a British Minister at the time, in circumstances that did not convince many other Members of Parliament. I believe that consensus is emerging that we must do something to remove the stain of dishonour on those soldiers, and on the Welsh, Scottish and English soldiers as well. Many of them had records of gallantry before those events occurred and were shot at dawn for behaving in a way that would now be regarded as rational and reasonable rather than shameful.

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and Wales: I am grateful to Paul for those remarks. I am aware of Andrew Mackinlay’s long campaign on this matter, which I respect. I cannot say any more about it at this stage, but I do think that there is an understanding on behalf of our Government of the situation and a lot of sympathy for the sentiments that have been expressed.

Westminister Hall 9:30am: Private Members' Debate: Mr Keith Simpson (Con) MP, on pardons for British soldiers executed in the First World War

Tuesday 28th March 2006

On Tuesday 28th March 2006 Irish Foreign Minister Dermot Ahern T.D laid before the Oireachtas a Report prepared in 2004 by his Department into the courts-martial and executions of 26 Irish-Born Soldiers by the British Army during the First World War. The Minister called for pardons for these Irish Soldiers executed during First World War (‘Shot at Dawn’). He stated:

1. Our unwavering objective is to engage in finding an agreed resolution on this issue that would bring comfort to the families of those executed.

2. The Minister recalled that this year marked the 90th anniversary of the Battle of the Somme. He stressed that it was in the spirit of recognising the experience and sacrifice of all our countrymen who fell during the First World War, that the Government had lent its support to the campaign to secure pardons for those Irish men who were 'shot at dawn'.

3. It is our objective to recover their memory from the dishonour that was done to them some 90 years ago.

4. A Debate was subsequently held in the Seanad on the Irish Shot at Dawn. see Irish Seanad Debates-Shot at Dawn Campaign: Statements.

BRITISH - IRISH

INTER - PARLIAMENTARY BODY -

THIRTY-THIRD PLENARY CONFERENCE - 23 and 24 October 2006 - The Waterfront Hall, Belfast.

Extract Minutes

Senator Brian Hayes: Thank you, Co-Chairman. When the Body met in Edinburgh in November 2005, the Shot at Dawn (Ireland) Campaign was debated. On that occasion, the Body’s collective view was that the British Government would move to ensure that pardons were granted to the unfortunate people who were killed in such terrible circumstances during the First World War. We can report progress on that. Over the summer, the UK Secretary of State for Defence, Des Browne, moved on the issue, and it would be right and proper for the Body to recognise that that movement has occurred. Families in Ireland in particular are grateful that Des Browne has given a commitment to resolve the issue. I wish to congratulate him publicly, and I think that the Body should do the same.

Mr Andrew Mackinlay MP: I will talk about the St Andrews Agreement in a moment. First, I would like to add to Senator Hayes’s comments about the pardons granted to British Army soldiers who were killed in such terrible circumstances during the First World War. At its last plenary conference, this Body made representations in respect of those soldiers, and this plenary conference an occasion to place on record the process that resulted in the British Government’s decision to grant those pardons. At the outset, the Irish Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform made representations to the United Kingdom Government in respect of the 26 Irish soldiers who were executed. Following that, four ingredients contributed to the granting of the pardons. First, the campaign had not gone away. Secondly, a wonderful lady called Gertie Harris, the daughter of an executed soldier, took the British Ministry of Defence to court: a case that the Ministry of Defence lost. The third ingredient was a change of Minister. Des Browne, a former Northern Ireland Minister, known to many people here and now Secretary of State for Defence, was sympathetic to the issue. The final element was the compelling representations made by the Taoiseach on behalf of the Irish Republic. The Ministry of Defence knew that, at some stage, it would have to reply to those representations and that to do so would be extraordinarily difficult, because the representations were part of a skilfully and carefully crafted legal submission. I place that on record and, as someone associated with the campaign, I express my gratitude to the Government of the Irish Republic for its contribution to remedying that wrong.

Comment: 

1. It was the Department of Foreign Affairs who compiled and submitted the report and not the Department of Justice.

2. The Shot at Dawn Campaign Ireland and the Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign in the UK are two separate and distinct groups; ie one Irish campaign and one British campaign independent of each other, albeit in pursuit of the same objective.

3. The Ministry of Defence did not lose the Farr case as asserted.  The Farr case had not reached a final conclusion and had not gone forward for a full hearing, indeed the preliminary opinion of Mr Justice Burnton in the initial application in May 2005 had already raised the legal bar to any future action by the British Government/MOD. Rather than resolving the issue the consequence of the Farr application in May 2005 effectively ruled out the full pardon option in all WW1 execution cases and any expected British political response to the Irish Government Report was re-routed and parked down a legal cul de sac for nearly two years, thereby taking the pressure off the British Government at a critical time in the Irish campaign. The introduction of the PARDONS FOR SERVICEMEN EXECUTED FOR DISCIPLINARY OFFENCES: RECOGNITION AS VICTIMS OF FIRST WORLD WAR on the 7th November 2006 is the British Government's official response to the Irish Government Report into the execution of the Irish Shot at Dawn 1914-18 encumbered by the limitations set out in May 2005 by Mr Justice Burnton in the Farr application. See notes below ₁.

4. Des Brown's humanitarian and exemplary common sense approach was most definitely a key element alongside the compelling Report by the Irish Government, which together contributed to a final resolution of the pardons issue.

Tuesday 7th November 2006

The House of Commons sat on Tuesday 7th November 2006 in Westminster Hall between 9.30am-2.00pm and sat again at 2.30pm:

Legislation – Armed Forces Bill - after 2.30pm – Consideration of Lords amendments which included debate on the Pardons Amendment

Wednesday 8th of November 2006:

Prorogation - Ending the 2005/06 session. The House will be prorogued on Wednesday 8th November 2006 when Royal Assent to all Acts has been signified.

Minister Dermot Ahern Welcomes Pardons for Irish Soldiers 'Shot At Dawn'

National Union of Journalists - Centenary Annual Delegate Meeting - 12 to 17 April 2007 - Birmingham - England.

Motion 113: This ADM welcomes the Government’s decision pardon the 306 British, Irish and Commonwealth troops executed for battlefield offences in the First World War. Conference congratulates all members who supported the Shot at Dawn Pardons campaign and instructs the General Secretary to write to campaign founder John Hipkin and Peter Mulvany, Shot at Dawn (Ireland) co-ordinator, congratulating them on their principled stand and ultimate success in the 16 - year battle to win justice for these men and boys – some as young as 17 – and their families. Conference further instructs the General Secretary to write to Defence Secretary Des Browne congratulating him on his humane decision to seek Parliament’s approval to pardon all those executed for disciplinary offences in the 1914 to 1918 conflict.