asked the Minister for Defence whether, consequent on a decision taken by the Government in June, 1957, with regard to the re-investigation of IRA service medals awarded prior to June, 1957, it is the intention to reinvestigate all medals awarded previous to that date; if not, for what period of years are the awards of medals being investigated; if he will state the number of cases which have been reinvestigated since June, 1957, stating in each case the year in which the medal was awarded and whether the medal was accepted as having been duly awarded; and the number of cases which remain to be investigated, stating in each case the year in which the medal was awarded.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - IRA Service Medals.
32.
It is necessary to reinvestigate entitlement to the Service (1917-1921) Medal only (i) where a person applies for a special allowance under the Army Pensions Acts by virtue of his being a holder of such a medal awarded prior to the Government decision of 14th June, 1957, or (ii) where I have reason to doubt the entitlement to the medal of a person in receipt of a special allowance. Re-investigation is not related to medals awarded in any particular period of years.
Records are not available of the number of medals reinvestigated prior to 1st November, 1961, or the number held to have been duly awarded, following reinvestigation prior to that date. Between June, 1957, and 31st October, 1961, 271 medals were held not to have been duly awarded. Since 1st November, 1961, 1,754 medal awards have been reinvestigated, of which 1,592 were held to have been duly awarded and 162 were held not to have been duly awarded. It is not feasible from the available records to ascertain the years in which the original awards in these cases had been made.
Since reinvestigation depends on the receipt of applications for special allowances, it is not possible to say what number of cases will have to be dealt with.
Is the Minister aware that his reply is a reflection on those who have medals? Only those who apply for the special allowance will get a certificate of service and in the meantime all of those who have a medal without a certificate that it was duly awarded are suspect. Is the Minister further aware that the Association of Old Fianna recently passed a resolution in Armagh that all cases of medal holders should be reinvestigated?
The Deputy is not asking a question.
Is the Minister aware that the Old IRA feel it is a reflection on them that they have a medal and not a certificate that it is duly awarded? They cannot prove that they are entitled to the medals as against the phoneys who have them and are not entitled to them. I have a medal and I have no certificate. I am suspect of being a phoney.
The Deputy is making a long statement and not asking a question.
Yes, and I will continue to make it.
At the appropriate time.
Is the Minister aware that there is grave dissatisfaction amongst people who had medals awarded to them and believe that they were duly awarded to them? When the reinvestigation takes place the applicant may have grave difficulty in having his application verified because of the death, in the meantime, of the certifying officer. Would the Minister not consider taking statements or even affidavits from people who have service certificates to verify the people whose medals are being reinvestigated?
Is the Deputy referring to certificates of service?
Will the Minister accept a declaration made by a person who is a holder of a service certificate that, say, Deputy Sherwin was a member at the time? Will he take that as verification? I think he should.
I would ask General MacEoin—I am calling him General —if he would accept such a certificate unless the man who gave it had been in a position to certify the service? Suppose a man with senior rank in Galway certifies the service of a man in North Mayo, should I accept such a certificate? All the circumstances surrounding a case have to be taken into account and I must be satisfied that a man who gives a certificate has good reason to do it. I can assure Deputy MacEoin that where there is some evidence that a man was a member at the time, we go to the furthest limit to give him the benefit of that evidence.
What the Old IRA want is some sort of certificate that their medals were duly awarded. If they have not got that, they are suspect of being phoneys.
I do not suggest that we should take the certificate of a man from another brigade but we should accept the declaration of a man of the same company who has already a service certificate that so-and-so was a colleague and served at that time. We should do that where other evidence is not available.
Is Deputy MacEoin asking me to accept such a certificate if there is counter evidence from the same unit?
If there is counter evidence by people of equal rank and membership we should bring them together and have them examine the matter and all the evidence pertaining to the application. Would the Minister consider, where such a conflict arises, that both parties be brought before the investigating body so that all the evidence can be examined?
Where one person certifies in favour of an applicant and where there is counter evidence, the usual practice is to notify the person who has issued the certificate that there is counter evidence and the nature of that evidence. I think that meets the Deputy's point.
What about the cases that are not in dispute at all? They are always suspect unless they apply for the special allowance and are granted the certificate. They have no means of proving that the medal was duly awarded.
The medal itself is the evidence.
Lots of phoneys have medals.