andMr. Casey asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to a report of an assault made by a military policeman on a press photographer at Ballycotton beach, County Cork on 18th February, in which the photographer was struck in the mouth when he attempted to take a picture of an object lying on the beach although he had not been warned by military personnel that he would not be permitted to photograph the object; whether the officer commanding the Southern Command received a telephone call from the Chairman of the Irish Council of the National Union of Journalists protesting against the assault; whether a protest in writing was made by the National Union of Journalists; what action he proposes to take in this matter; and what steps he proposes to take to ensure that journalists in the performance of their duties will not be interfered with by servants of the State.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Interference with Journalists.
I am aware of the incident to which the question refers and that protests as mentioned were made.
The Deputies will appreciate that in cases where potentially dangerous objects are washed ashore it is incumbent on the military authorities to take such precautions as they consider necessary to safeguard life and prevent damage to property. In the case in question it was considered necessary to control access to the beach on which the unidentified object was lying and the military policemen who were detailed for this purpose were ordered not to allow unauthorised persons to approach the area. It was in pursuance of this order that the military policeman concerned was involved in the incident with the photographer and, while I very much regret that the incident should have occurred, the military authorities have indicated that they are satisfied that the military policeman was merely endeavouring to carry out his duties to the best of his ability. I understand that expressions of regret have been conveyed by the Officer Commanding, Southern Command, to the Director of the Cork Examiner and the Chairman of the Irish Area Council of the National Union of Journalists who had protested to him about the occurrence and an appropriate reply is being issued to the letter received in my Department from the Radio Branch of the National Union of Journalists.
I might add that there have always been excellent relations between the Army and representatives of the Press and I would like to assure the Deputies that the military authorities are most anxious and will do everything possible to continue to co-operate with these representatives in the future.
During the course of the investigation into this matter, did the Minister ascertain that the chief photographer of the Cork Examiner, accompanied by a staff reporter from Radio Éireann, proceeded to Ballycotton taking the usual precaution of showing on their windscreen that they were representatives of the Press? Did he ascertain they parked their car outside the Garda station in Ballycotton at 7 a.m. when there was much activity by Army and Garda personnel? In spite of the fact that both of them were well known and that their car was marked with a disc indicating they represented the Press, the car was examined by the gardaí and that an officer of the Army——
Would Deputy Casey allow me? He seems to be making a speech and not asking a question.
No, I am asking the Minister——
The Deputy is giving information. This is Question Time, when Deputies should ask questions.
Is the Minister aware that officers of the Defence Forces bade "Good morning" to these Press representatives and did not indicate in any way that they should not proceed to photograph the object lying on the beach? Subsequently, these two Pressmen——
The Deputy is continuing to make a speech. He should ask the Minister a question.
Is the Minister further aware that a military policeman approached the photographer in question, physically assaulted him and put him under arrest? He appeared to be under arrest by the Army authorities for some time. Does the Minister think the Army authorities are entitled at this stage, as indicated in his reply, to pass the blame for the whole thing over to the NCO who carried out the assault and that the officers can wash their hands of the whole affair? They knew the photographers were there. They met them and gave them no warning and no indication that they should not be there or should not proceed about their lawful duties. Does the Minister think that is good enough?
That is a long supplementary question. I am not disposed to confirm or otherwise the version of the affair as recounted by Deputy Casey.
You are shirking your duty, so?
I am not.
You are. Allegations have been made.
I am quite satisfied the military authorities were there carrying out a certain function which they were requested to do by another authority.
What authority?
This object belonged to the American authorities.
You got scared?
There was no question of getting scared. It was a question of the military personnel carrying out their duties to protect the public. The military officer in charge of the operation was there on the street at the time this gentleman and his companion came along, and he never even mentioned to the military officer on the spot that he was——
There was a Press sign on his car.
The NCO was doing his duty according to his instructions, and the NCO was adequately instructed when he was carrying out his duties.
What about the officer who saw that this was a Press car?
Arising from the Minister's original reply and having regard to the expressed desirability of good relations between the Press and the Army, is the Minister aware that an Army officer, acting in the capacity of a freelance photographer—not a member of the NUJ—during the course of the Army investigation, wrote an article in a Southern paper condemning the photographer and the journalist, and has the Minister taken any action in connection with this matter? I raise the question strictly having regard to the fact that there was an investigation taking place and an Army officer saw fit to take this action knowing that an investigation was taking place.
That is a separate question.
What more does anyone want the Army to do than express regret for an incident they regret? Do they want them to crawl all over the floor in Dáil Éireann?
In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I propose to raise this matter on the Adjournment.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.