asked the Minister for Defence why a declaration by a section commander of the applicant's company was not accepted by him as evidence of membership from 1st April, 1921 to 11th July, 1921 for a 1916-21 medal; and if he will state the ranks of the officers on the 11th July, 1921 whose evidence he accepted that the applicant was not a member of the Forces in the qualifying period.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Applicant for Service Medal.
70.
In accordance with the pattern of investigation of applications for the Service (1917-1921) Medal laid down by An Rialtas in 1957, reports were sought in the case which the Deputy has in mind from all available persons recorded as having been, during the three months ended 11th July, 1921, officers of the battalion and company of which the applicant claimed membership.
The evidence obtained did not establish that the applicant was a member of Óglaigh na hÉireann (IRA) during the three months ended 11th July, 1921, and, consequently, the medal could not be awarded to him.
The person who made the "declaration" to which, it is assumed, the Deputy refers is not recorded as having held any rank during the critical period. His name appears on the relative company roll as a volunteer. As such, his evidence would not be acceptable for the purpose of verification of entitlement to the Medal.
It will be appreciated that the reports received from former IRA officers who co-operate in the investigation of applications for the Medal are confidential documents and that the contents of such reports, or the identity of their authors, cannot, therefore, be disclosed.
Is the Minister aware that this person who made the affidavit was a section commander? If he has been returned on the list as a volunteer that is inaccurate. He was a section commander between the relevant dates, that is, 1st April, 1921, and 11th July, 1921. I did not ask the Minister for the nature of the reports nor did I ask him for the names of the officers who certified that he was not a member. I asked for the ranks of the officers. The battalion officers were many miles away from this person and could not know whether he was a member or not without inquiring from people of equivalent rank, that is, to a section commander or a person like that in the area. They would not, any more than myself, be able to say of their own knowledge that he was a member. What I want to know is the rank of the officers whose evidence the Minister accepts in regard to that period.
In answer to the first question, the person mentioned is on the list for the company in question. I have no evidence that he was a section commander. The regulations drawn up in 1957 state that the persons to whom such applications may be referred must be battalion or company officers. The Deputy knows as well as I do what the ranks of company officers were.
Is the Minister further aware that there are no company officers alive of that company who held rank between those dates, 1st April and 11th July, 1921 and whom he could consult? There are officers alive who held ranks subsequent to the 11th July. I am asking the Minister for the ranks of the battalion officers who gave evidence that he was not a member. I think I am entitled to that information.
The Deputy knows in regard to the ranks of battalion officers that the man in charge was a commandant, the next in charge was a vicecommandant and so far as I remember, the adjutant or quarter-master would rank as captain. At least that is the way it was in the organisation in which I was. I do not know whether it was different in Longford.
The Estimate is coming before the House and I suppose I would have an opportunity of raising this but I would rather get rid of it. The Minister knows well that I know these ranks. What I am asking is the ranks of the officers who now have given the certificate that this person was not a member. Was it the battalion OC? Was it a commandant or a captain? Was it a vice-OC or adjutant? There are four officers in a battalion and I want to know which of the ranks gave the certificate that he was not a member.
I prefer to deal with this by using the term "appointment". The battalion and company officers holding the appropriate appointments certified. The Deputy seems to suggest that the appropriate officers were not alive when this report was received in the Department of Defence. I cannot argue that with him but I shall look it up. So far as I know, the appropriate officers were alive and it is on their report we have acted.
The Minister might as well give their names, if that is the case.