Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 21 May 1946

Vol. 101 No. 4

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Prison Conditions.

asked the Minister for Justice if he is aware of the statements made, by the medical officer of Portlaoighise Prison, at the inquest on the late Seán MacCaughey, on Saturday, May 11th, 1946, that for a period of four and a half years the deceased had not been allowed out into the fresh air, had been kept in solitary confinement and not allowed to speak or associate with any other person, and also that he, the medical officer, would not treat a dog in that fashion; and whether, in view of these statements, he will immediately order that a sworn inquiry be held to investigate prison conditions in this country.

It is not my intention to order that an inquiry should be held to investigate prison conditions in this country. There is no need for such an inquiry. The prison conditions here are well known to compare favourably with those in any other country.

The position in regard to the late Seán MacCaughey and seven other prisoners who were found guilty of the most serious crimes that could be committed against the community, including murder and attempted murder, is as follows:—

These men on being sent to Portlaoighise Prison demanded that they be allowed to wear their own clothes, contrary to the rule that all long-term prisoners shall wear clothes of a uniform make and colour as prescribed. This demand being rejected, these prisoners refused to wear the clothes provided for them and, instead, improvised garments from their blankets. For obvious reasons of discipline, they could not be allowed to appear before other prisoners, or to go out of doors while so attired. On this account also, they have been exempted from the work usually prescribed.

It is not true to say that these men are kept in solitary confinement or are not allowed to associate with any other person. They are allowed to associate, for recreation, for two periods of one and a half hours each (three hours in all) every day in a large and well-ventilated room, the windows of which look out on the prison farm. In addition, they are frequently visited by members of the visiting committee, the chaplain, the governor, officers of the prison and the inspector of the prisons division of the Department of Justice, They are allowed to write letters and to receive letters, newspapers and books. They are given the ordinary prison diet with occasional additions. So far as any unusual restrictions are imposed on them, this is necessitated solely by their own action in refusing to conform to the ordinary prison regulations by wearing the clothes provided for them.

MacCaughey's health was good until he went on hunger strike and the health of the others has similarly been uniformly good, and MacCaughey went on hunger strike not because of the conditions of his imprisonment but to force his release.

The matters referred to in the Deputy's question were not the subject of inquiry at the inquest. Any reference to them arose out of questions asked in cross-examination by counsel representing the next-of-kin and pressed contrary to the deputy coroner's ruling. The replies given by a single witness under the type of cross-examination to which he was subjected do not give any true picture of the real situation.

The questions at issue are these: Must the Government distinguish between those who commit murder and other serious crimes for one reason and those who seek to justify their crimes on the ground that they have a political aim in view? Must we allow convicted prisoners to dictate the conditions under which they are to be detained? Must we allow them to force their release by going on hunger strike and so enable them to commit their crimes with impunity? It must be clear to the Deputy and to everybody else that if the answer to these questions were "yes", there would be an end to all restraint of evildoers and to all effective efforts to preserve ordered conditions in the community.

For a long time, the Government pursued a deliberate policy of leniency towards the group to which these men belong. We failed to get them to respect or recognise the rights of the community, but we have no intention of allowing them to enforce their will by organised crime. During the recent war, these men, if they had their way, would have brought immeasurable disaster on this nation. Short of execution, our only safeguard against their violence is imprisonment and we shall not allow them to deprive the community of that safeguard by the hunger strike or any other device.

I am surprised, Sir, that you allowed the Minister to reply to a simple question in the way in which he has replied.

The Deputy may ask supplementary questions.

I asked a question here and I will repeat it. I asked——

The Deputy may not read out his question. He has already put it. If he has a supplementary question to put, he may do so.

I was treated to a reply in which the Minister talked about people committing murder. I did not ask anything in that connection. I was surprised at the Minister's reply.

The Deputy may ask a supplementary question.

He said that people had been convicted of murder. Was MacCaughey convicted of murder? I asked a question as to whether the statement by the medical officer is correct or incorrect.

Mr. Boland

I dealt with that in my reply, if the Deputy cares to read it.

In view of the Minister's reply, I regret very much that I must ask your permission, Sir, to raise the matter on the Adjournment to-night, or at the first available opportunity.

Deputy O'Higgins has given notice of his intention to raise another matter on the Adjournment.

I am aware of that, but in view of the fact that the oldest court in the land, the most honourable court in the land, has been turned down, I suggest I might be allowed to raise the matter at the first available opportunity.

Mr. Boland

I would prefer more than half-an hour to deal with this question.

We will give you two hours at it, if you like.

Barr
Roinn