Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 7 Jul 1943

Vol. 91 No. 3

Committee on Finance. - The Adjournment: Prisoners on Hunger Strike.

Mr. Norton

This evening I addressed a question to the Minister for Justice calling attention to the fact that certain men, uncharged and untried prisoners, were on hunger strike for a long period and were in a critical condition, and I asked the Minister if it would not be a good thing to issue an order for their immediate release. I did not submit that question in any Party spirit. It was grounded on national and humanitarian grounds, and the plea which I am making to the Minister now is not a plea inspired in any way by considerations of Party advantage or Party position. My plea now, as well as the question earlier, is based on humanitarian considerations, and I hope the Minister will understand the purpose I have in raising the matter. The position confronting the country to-day is that there are three men on hunger strike at the Curragh Camp for a period of 44 days. If any Deputies were to miss their meals for a few days they would understand what effect the ravages of want of food were going to have on their physique; but when we reflect on the physical and mental torture which these three men must have endured during the past 44 days, we get some picture of their physical and mental condition lying in an internment camp at the Curragh Camp. It is easy to imagine that men who have abstained from food for 44 days would be physically weak in body and seriously anguished in mind. That is the position of these three prisoners who are in the internment camp at present.

My fear—and it is a fear that is shared by many people who have no sympathy with the protest that these men are making—is that their death, if death should, unfortunately, occur, will constitute a national tragedy so far as this country is concerned. We have a past which unfortunately has been marked and characterised by unpleasant incidents of this character, incidents which have not made life easier, and which have not made the attainment of the national objective easier. These are incidents which every member of this House desires to avoid at any time, and which every Deputy should especially desire to avoid at a time of crisis such as that through which we are now passing. If, because of the protest which these men are making, the death of any one of them should occur, and if these three men resolve to fast until they are released, or to bring about their death, then it seems to me that the inevitable consequence of their death will be increased Party bitterness and disunity, at a time when the nation should avoid all bitterness and should try to obviate all causes of disunity. In my view unity and stability are two of the greatest factors which will make for the safety of this nation in the crisis, and I think the Legislature, and the Government in particular, have placed upon them a moral obligation, in fact a national obligation, to ensure that nothing is allowed to happen which would tend to disturb unity or to imperil the stability which each and every Minister must realise is so essential to our national preservation.

I should like the House to understand that the three men who are making this protest against detention have not been charged with any offence. They have not been tried on any charge, still these untried and uncharged men feel so bitterly about the-position in which they have been placed that, for the past 44 days they have undergone the pain and torture which abstention from food for that long period eventually brings upon even the most physically perfect. Whatever one may say or may think of the method of protest which they have chosen, I think most people will understand the motives which provoked them to resort to this method of protest.

These men feel that they have not been charged; they know that they have not been tried, yet, they find their liberty taken away for as long a period as two years. Apparently no effort is being made to, arraign them on any charge, or to bring them before any judge and jury, or even before the auxiliary courts that were established for the purpose of trying what might be described as "political offences." The defence which the Minister made to-day for not releasing these prisoners is that at liberty they would constitute a danger to the State. On reflection it is hard to believe that the Minister really believes that. Here are three men who have undergone the torture of 44 days' hunger strike. To imagine that these three men, after that prolonged period of hunger strike, would constitute a danger to this State is asking the House and the country to accept something which neither the House nor the country will believe. After being on hunger strike for that prolonged period these men are to-day emaciated physically, their minds wrung with anguish and torture, and to imagine that if released to-night or to-morrow they would constitute any danger to this State is asking people to believe something which their imagination is not capable of comprehending.

It should be obvious to each and every one of us that men who have undergone the long ordeal of 44 days' hunger strike will be invalids for a long period. One might say that a hunger strike of that duration is well calculated to make them invalids for the rest of their lives, whether these lives be long or short, having regard to the ordeal they have undertaken and are undergoing. I do not believe the release of these physically-ruined men would constitute any danger to the State. If the State believes—I cannot understand why the State will not believe it—that men so physically impaired and so mentally worried would not constitute a danger to the State, then I cannot understand why the State insists on detaining them. No matter what crime a prisoner may be guilty of, no matter what crime even a convicted prisoner may be guilty of, there is a moral and legal responsibility on the Government to take every possible step to safeguard the life of that convicted prisoner while he is in their custody. If any prisoner convicted of the most heinous crime were to attempt while in the charge of the Government to take his own life, there is a moral and legal obligation on the Government to restrain him in every possible way from doing so.

The lives of these men are in the hands of the Government to-night. They are in the hands of the Government so long as they are in the custody of the Government, and I think the Government, having recognised that fact, ought not to allow this protest to continue longer lest by its continuance the lives of these people would be endangered and national unity and national stability impaired.

I want to put this consideration to the Minister for Justice and the Govment. On the one side you have a powerful Executive with an army, a police force and a judiciary, with all the authority that comes to you from being a Government, and on the other side you have three helpless, physically emaciated persons, lying in a well-protected internment camp on the Curragh to-night. I suggest to the Government that it ought not to pit its strength against the strength and resolve and mental determination of these three men. The Government ought to recognise in this case that its real strength is in the showing of elemency and the exercise of humanity towards these three prisoners. It will ill serve the Government and national unity and national stability if the Government must embark upon a campaign of trying its strength against these three helpless men. I beg of the Government not to pursue a course of that kind, and to recognise that these are uncharged and untried men, that they have undergone the physical torture of 44 days' hunger strike, and recognising that fact and not wanting to endanger national unity that the Government will say they are now prepared to release these untried and uncharged men, firstly, because they are invalids; secondly, because they have committed no known offence with which they can be charged; and thirdly, because their release would not constitute any danger to the existence of this State.

I want to say to the Minister again, and I say it in no Party spirit but with a feeling of desire to avoid strife and bitterness here, that if the deaths of these men take place, a national tragedy will have been enacted. Little will have been done either to preserve the authority or majesty of this State if these three men are allowed to die, and while there is yet time—I understand their condition to-night is indeed serious—I hope that the Government, on reconsideration, will reflect on the situation and take steps immediately to order their release. If the Government do that it will not be a sign of weakness—it will be a sign of two things: firstly, that the Government is not willing to allow uncharged and untried Irishmen to die on hunger strike in an Irish internment camp, and, secondly, that the Government have given an earnest of their desire to preserve national unity by avoiding courses which might in some way impair the continued existence of that unity.

Mr. Maguire

I wonder if the Minister could take into consideration the anxiety which prevails among relatives through the absence of any public information and the rumours that naturally follow that? Anxiety has been felt that a greater number of internees were involved in this hunger strike, and consequently in danger of their health and lives. Would the Minister consider it advisable to withdraw the censorship so as to make known to the public more frequently any trouble that arises and the extent to which it exists? Personally, I can see very well the Minister's view. The Government must have authority, but the internment of men without trial is obnoxious to most of the public. It occurred to me while Deputy Norton was speaking that it might be possible for the Minister, where a person is under suspicion, to bring him before the court. If he refused to recognise the court, some punishment by way of imprisonment should be applied rather than internment without charge. That, in itself, is obnoxious to the public. I merely make that suggestion.

Mr. Flanagan

I do not intend to say very much on this subject as I think Deputy Norton has fully dealt with it. Just a few moments ago I received a telegram from Donegal and it read:

"Donegal Republicans thank you most sincerely for your kind intervention on behalf of the internees and the hunger strikers, and earnestly pray your efforts may be successful. St. Malachi, Primate and Archbishop of Armagh, and the Papal Legate went on hunger strike against Turlogh More O'Connor, High King, to secure the release of noblemen who had been under Malachi's protection apd had been imprisoned by the High King's authority.—See ‘Life of Saint Malachi' by Father Luddy, page 76."

I am honestly of the opinion, like Deputy Norton and Deputy Maguire, that it is a disgrace to see those men untried and uncharged being this very night faced with death, and I would not like to be the Minister or the Government that would live on and carry on with the blood of those men on their hands. I will make one request as a new member and I hope I will soften the Minister's conscience. I will ask him in the Name of God, for Ireland's sake, and for the sake of the relatives of those men to kindly free them. Surely to goodness the State is not afraid of three men? What sort of Government is it at all? Surely three men on hunger strike are not going to upset the whole procedure of the State? Seven women are in Mountjoy without any charge or crime in the wide world. Maire O'Sullivan from the South Dublin area is there since August, 1940, and there was never any charge made against her. The others are: Eileen O'Kelly, since February, 1942; Mollie and Pat Gallagher since September, 1942; Maggie O'Halloran (Kerry) since October, 1942; Maggie Doyle since November, 1942, and Patricia Kelly since March, 1943. Surely, the Minister and the Government are not afraid of those women?

An Ceann Comhairle

If the Deputy reads the question he will find no reference to internees generally.

Mr. Flanagan

I would kindly request the Minister to release those men if at all possible. As a Republican, I think it is the bounden duty of the Government to allow no Republican to be in prison without charge. A question has been raised about recognising the courts. I was brought before a District Court in Mountrath, and I say that at present there is as much justice outside the courthouse as there is inside.

Mr. Finucane

It is a fundamental principle of justice in most democratic countries that a man is innocent of crime until he is found guilty in accordance with law, and it is a principle of Christianity that the person of individual citizens must be respected. Three men against whom no charge has been proved, in fact against whom no charge has been made, are at present on hunger strike in the Curragh Camp as a protest against what they consider is their unjust detention. All of these men are in grave danger of immediate death—in fact it is doubtful whether one of them, McLoughlin, is alive even while I am speaking. Two of the three men, McCool and O'Doherty, are from the Six Counties. The only reason for O'Doherty's detention here is that he escaped from the custody of the Government in Stormont. The other, McCool, after serving a sentence of five years in the Crumlin Road Jail, in Belfast, was arrested immediately after he crossed the Border on his release.

How can the Government reconcile their treatment of these two Northern nationalists with their protestations of desire to end Partition? How are the interests of the Irish people served by the Government allowing these men to die? In the interest of national unity, the calamity of their deaths should be avoided so that feeling in the country be not further embittered. If all the complicated powers of Government administration and of the censored Press, are to be used to the bitter end against these three men, will the result not be that confidence in the integrity of the administration will be undermined? Will the people not be entitled to say, and rightly say, that the personal spites and bitternesses of the individuals who are sitting in the Government Front Bench are more important to them than the interests of justice and national unity?

Minister for Justice (Mr. Boland)

It appears to be the position now that certain Deputies are objecting to the right of internment, and seem to think that we must bring all these people to trial or let them out. I understood that the last Dáil was perfectly satisfied that it was absolutely necessary to intern these people during this period of emergency through which we are going. It will be remembered that, about the beginning of June, 1940, about 400 people were interned, and if the House did not agree to that, certainly no objection was made to it in the House itself. The whole matter was to be dealt with in a private way and, if there was any objection to the internment of certain people, it could be dealt with in another place. There was agreement, however, that in the critical position in which we found ourselves, we should have the right to intern certain people who might be a menace to public order. At any rate, that was the position that we had to face, and it is still the position, and will remain so as long as war is raging all around us. If it is going to be insisted on that the Government should let these people out or bring them to trial, the country could not carry on; we could not preserve our peace or our neutrality, because these people are determined, and have shown their determination from the very beginning of this war, to involve us in it, if they could. That is no wild statement; it is an absolute fact, and is well known to members of this House.

With regard to the people on hunger strike, I am very sorry, because I feel for them every day while they are on hunger strike, but I am up against this position: that we have got to maintain the right to intern people without trial while the emergency lasts.

Mr. Looney

So had Britain, when she had an emergency here.

Mr. Boland

I did not catch what the Deputy said. We must maintain that right, and if any man who is interned thinks he is wrongly interned he has his remedy. He has only to make representations, himself or through any of his friends, and I think I can say, without fear of contradiction, that at any time that that was done, no Deputy who ever approached me on behalf of any internee ever went away without being satisfied that if the person concerned was not released it was because I could give good reasons for holding him. I can tell the House that the police advised me about the release of three internees against whom there was no charge. I myself objected to the release of these men because I suspected them—not that I am very suspicious, but I had reason to suspect them. The police, however, assured me that these men had mended their ways and would obey the law. They were released accordingly, and what was the result? Inside a couple of months one of our best detective officers, Sergeant O'Brien, was foully murdered outside his home, and we suspect that some of these three men were the principal men concerned in that murder. Since last September two other Guards were murdered, and we suspect one of these released internees of being guilty of the murder. We have not got them yet. That is the sort of position that we have to face.

One of these men on hunger strike was released, without any condition, on my instructions and against the advice of the police. This man had been sentenced to five years' penal servitude in the Six Counties. He was a native of Donegal, and our police arrested him. Representations were made to me on his behalf, and I thought he should get a fair chance, so I told the police that They advised me strongly not to release him, but I did not take their advice, and he was released, and inside of three months we found that he was acting as Chief of Staff of the I.R.A. That is the position.

There is not one of these internees whose case I have not examined carefully from time to time. There is not one of them in respect of whom I am not prepared to do that now, and I do not think the House should force me to give way under this pressure of the hunger strike, because it will mean that we can hold nobody. I nave a melancholy recollection of the last time on which we released a man on hunger strike. He was a friend of my own. Pressure was brought to bear on us from all sides to release him, and we gave way and he was released. What was the result? That unfortunate man was at the point of death, as these men, as Deputy Norton says, are, and we did not think he could live. Inside a couple of months of his release, he and a comrade shot two of our Gárdaí in Rathgar, and he himself and his comrade had to be executed for that.

I think the House should stand behind me in this matter. I say this without fear of contradiction: that in the case of any one in respect of whom a case could be made to have him released, he has been released. They have not been humiliated, they have not been asked to sign any humiliating conditions. When one of the hunger strikers was standing for Donegal he was offered his release on parole, on condition that he would abstain from breaking the law, but he insisted that his release should he unconditional. That meant that he challenged our right to hold him, and it also means that he was going to persist in trying to involve this country in the war. As a responsible Minister, I could not stand for that.

I do regret that any man should die on hunger strike, but I will not take the responsibility. The responsibility is on themselves. They have been offered their food. They can get their liberty on the same terms as everybody else. They can all have their liberty if they are prepared to obey the laws of the State; but if they will not accept their liberty on the same terms as everybody else, then the Government is determined that they will be held until they are prepared to do so. I expect that the necessity for internment will not exist when the war is over, but unfortunately the war situation is still there, and these people are a public menace. If any internee wants to get out, he can get out in the way I have suggested, and every Deputy here should know that. Perhaps some of the new Deputies are not aware of it, but I am always prepared to deal with any of these cases, and if there is any sign that these people are prepared to obey the law of the State that will be accepted and they will be released, but that is the position.

I am very sorry to have to say that if any of these men are prepared to die on hunger strike, I cannot help it. I very much regret it, but there is no way out that I can see, and I cannot see what else we are to do.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Thursday, 8th July.