LAST UPDATE:
THURSDAY: 15 FEBRUARY 2024: |
|
|
In
1998,
the
British
Shot at
Dawn Pardons Campaign
was effectively dead in the
water as a
result
of Minister
of Defence John Reid's
refusal
to countenance
any pardons. Following
a
telephone
call
in June 2001 from the coordinator
of
the British Shot at Dawn
Pardons Campaign who confirmed that his campaign effort was effectively
going backwards, one decided to set up a separate Irish Shot at Dawn
Campaign and it was agreed and understood by those in the UK that to be
effective the Irish group would have to be totally separate from the British
campaign and organised and managed from within the Republic of Ireland and
to include the whole Island of Ireland. It was the Irish SAD Campaign effort
that made the difference and but for the Irish input the Shot at Dawn
Pardons Campaign efforts in the UK would still be languishing in the
cul-de-sac of the British political and legal system ad infinitum. The Shot
at Dawn Campaign Irl founded and co-ordinated from Dublin was an independent
Irish based group and was never a part or an adjunct of the British Shot at
Dawn Pardons Campaign. The Shot at Dawn Campaign Ireland and the Shot at
Dawn Pardons Campaign in the UK were always two separate and distinct
entities; ie one Irish Campaign and one British Campaign, independent of
each other, albeit in pursuit of the same objective. Our unique Irish
identity was a major contributing factor and was one of the main reasons why
the Irish SAD Campaign was so successful in attracting support. As some
pundits continue to ignore or minimise the Irish Governments role towards
the successful resolution of the pardons issue in 2006, the following
inter-alia might be taken into account whenever discussions arise as to who
did what and when:
1.
On the 11 December 2003: following a request by the
Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl
to the Irish Government requesting their support to
persuade the British Government to introduce pardons for WW1 executed
service personnel: The Irish Government announced their commitment to
support our efforts : See
Dail Debates 11th December 2003 - Shot at Dawn Campaign:
2. 09 March 2004:
House of Commons: WW 1 Executed Soldiers:
Bob Spink MP: To ask the Secretary of State
for Defence:
(1) what representations and
discussions he has had on the
Irish Government's recent support
for a pardon for those
soldiers wrongly executed during
the First World War as part of the 90th anniversary of the outbreak of the
war;
(2) if he will make it his
policy to consult the Irish Government prior to the anniversary of the start
of the First World War on the possible pardon of soldiers who were wrongly
executed during the First World War;
(3) what plans he has to
grant pardons to the
Soldiers
in the British Army who were executed in the First World War to mark the
90th anniversary of the outbreak of the war.
Mr Caplin MP: This matter was fully examined
during the detailed review led by my right hon. Friend the Member for
Hamilton, North and Bellshill
(Dr. John Reid), which was completed in 1998,
and reported to the House 24 July 1998 Official Report, columns 1372–86. As
a result, those who were executed have been recognised as victims of the War
(No Pardons granted by Reid). An initial meeting at official level has been
held at the request of the Irish Government on the subject of a possible
pardon for Irish soldiers executed during the First World War and further
contact is expected:
3.
On the 28 October 2004: A Confidential
Irish Government
report into the execution of the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn during world
war one, was submitted to the British Government by the Irish Government.
Despite a freedom of information request from a British Newspaper in 2005
and continued requests to have the Irish report released the British
Government steadfastly refused to release its contents:
4.
16 November 2004: Requested the support of Senator Brian Hayes FG and
Senator Paschal Mooney FF to raise the issue of pardons for the 26 Irish WW1
Shot at Dawn with their British colleagues at the next meeting of the
British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body:
5. 17 November
2004: Dail Debates:
Execution of Irish Born Soldiers:
6. 03 August 2005: Following a request that
sight of the Irish Report was urgently required by the Farr Solicitors for
their next hearing. A copy of Irish Government
Report into the 26 Irish executed
was forwarded to their solicitors:
7. 28 November 2005: Irish Times:
Pardon Sought For Irish Executed Deserters:
8. 28 November 2005:
Outrage At Refusal To Pardon Shot War Deserters:
9. 28 and 29 November 2005: British-Irish
Inter-Parliamentary Body: Thirty-First Plenary Conference Edinburgh: At the
request of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl: Pardons issue raised by Irish
members Senator Brian Hayes FG and Senator Paschal Mooney FF at the
Edinburgh meeting of the
British-Irish Inter-parliamentary Body:
10. 09 January 2006: House of Lords: First World
War: Pardons: Inspired by the example in Edinburgh by the contribution to
the pardons debate by Senators Hayes and Mooney: Lord Dubs asked Her
Majesty's Government: ‘Whether they will now consider granting a pardon to
the troops serving in the British Armed Forces who were shot for alleged
cowardice and desertion during the First World War’?
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldhansrd/vo060109/text/60109-01.htm
11.
12 January 2006: Following a request for information: Briefing material
including a copy of the confidential Irish Government
Report into the executions of the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn
was sent to Lord Dubs for his attention, as he advised he wished to
raise the issue of pardons for WW1 executed soldiers in a special debate in
the Lord’s over the next few months:
12.
17 January 2006: Lord Dubs emailed the question:
"Would the New Zealand model for pardons be
an appropriate way forward"
NOTE:
The
following is a re-edited very short version of a legal opinion communicated
to Lord Dubs by the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl:
QUOTE:
“In light of the previous opinion of
the Farr Case last May 2005 where Mr Justice Stanley Burnton found that
there was "room for argument" that he, Harry Farr, had been wrongly refused
a conditional pardon, his honour's legal opinion, is a way out for the MOD,
if they wish, before any final adjudication of the matter in March by the
courts, conditional means what it says, i.e. pursuant to the
New Zealand (Pardons) Act.”
UNQUOTE:
NOTE:
An explanatory follows as to the legal effect of the NZ Pardons Act, which
was also communicated to the British and Irish Governments: See: The New
Zealand Pardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act: A Legal Prospective:
13. On Tuesday
28th March 2006 the Irish Government, against British objections, and
pursuant to an
Irish Seanad Debate, unilaterally released their confidential
report into the executions of the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn in order to
facilitate and inform debate in the UK, and in particular, to support the
Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign effort to achieve Pardons for our 26 Irish
executed:
29 March 2006: Irish Times pdf: Ahern to press UK on pardons for shot
soldiers:
14. On the 15th
August 2006 the Irish Government was contacted through diplomatic channels
to advise that the British intended to initiate legislation to grant pardons
to all the 306, in particular the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn. It was conveyed to
the Irish Government that this British Pardons legislation was the
official British Government response to the
Irish Government report submitted to the Ministry of Defence via the
Foreign and Commonwealth office in late 2004:
15.
Through diplomatic channels, the Irish Government persuaded the British
Government to expand the effects of their pardons legislation by inter alia
having an
acknowledgement of the pardon granted inscribed on all the Shot at Dawn
courts-martial files, and a record of the pardon to be made available to
families on request:
16.
18 September 2006: Cabinet Office: World War 1 Veterans
(Pardons):
In a written statement, Secretary of State for Defence (Des Browne)
records: On 16 August I announced that the Government plan to seek
parliamentary approval for a statutory pardon for service personnel executed
for a range of disciplinary offences during the First World War. I am now
taking this opportunity to confirm these plans to the House and to provide
some further information on our intentions. As the amendment would affect
the cases of personnel who were serving in the armed forces of a number of
dominions and colonies, we are consulting with the Governments of those
states or their successors on our plans. We are expecting to receive their
responses shortly
but I can confirm that our decision has
already been welcomed by one of those principally affected
(The Irish Government). I anticipate the Government's proposal will also be
warmly welcomed by the public at large and particularly by the families
concerned".
NOTE:
From January 2004, the Irish Government consistently lobbied the British
Government to get the British side to act and introduce a pardoning
mechanism to resolve the WW1 executions of the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn. In
this regard the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl contributed a submission to
address British concerns suggesting the New Zealand Government's Pardon for
Soldiers of the Great War Act 2000 should be considered as a way of
resolving the Pardons issue in the UK. Our submission entitled "The New
Zealand Pardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act 2000, A Legal Prospective"
follows:
NOTE:
THE LANGUAGE USED IN THE 2000 NZ PARDONS LEGISLATION HAS BEEN REPLICATED IN
PART BY THE BRITISH: See extract Des Browne's Statement:
"that execution was not a fate that the individual deserved but resulted
from the particular discipline and penalties considered to be necessary at
the time" : "so far as possible
remove the particular dishonour that execution brought to the individuals
and their families": SEE ALSO
PARDON ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
17.
The pardons granted were effective when her Majesty signed the legislation
into law on Wednesday 8th November 2006, following its passage through the
House of Commons:
18.
All 306 executed for military offences
during world war one were pardoned together and in
alphabetical order pursuant to this legislation:
19. Although
the names of the Irish Shot at Dawn were included in the Commonwealth War
Graves Register, the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn were not listed in the separate
Irish War Memorial Register. Following the successful outcome to the Pardons
campaign, their names are now included in Irish war memorial records:
British-Irish Inter- Parliamentary
Body-Thirty Third Plenary - Conference
23 and 24
October 2006: The Waterfront Hall, Belfast.
EXTRACT MINUTES
Mr Andrew Mackinlay MP:
"I will talk about the St Andrews Agreement
in a moment. First, I would like to add to Senator Hayes’s comments about
the pardons granted to British Army soldiers who were killed in such
terrible circumstances during the First World War. At its last plenary
conference, this Body made representations in respect of those soldiers, and
this plenary conference an occasion to place on record the process that
resulted in the British Government’s decision to grant those pardons. At
the outset, the Irish Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform
made representations to the United Kingdom Government in respect of the 26
Irish soldiers who were executed. Following that, four ingredients
contributed to the granting of the pardons."
Mackinlay:
"First, the
campaign had not gone away":
SAD
IRL: Over the years, the Shot
at Dawn Pardons Campaign in the UK did make various attempts to resolve the
WW1 pardons issue, however we in Ireland were advised in 2001 by John Hipkin,
that the UK pardons campaign had effectively been halted in its tracks by
the continual rejection of their efforts by the Ministry of Defence from
1998, and the annual rejection of
Mr Mackinlay's Bill for pardons in the House of Commons. The UK Pardons
campaign may not have gone away as Mr Mackinlay opines, however, it was
certainly not moving forward and obviously needed to be re-invigorated if it
was to achieve its objective. John Hipkin of the Shot at Dawn Pardons
Campaign in the UK, requested our assistance to kick-start a pardons
campaign in Ireland and lobby the Irish Government to persuade the UK
Government to introduce enabling legislation and grant pardons to WW1
executed Shot at Dawn Soldiers. Subsequently, a separate group named The
Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl was formed with that objective in mind.
Mackinlay:
"Secondly, a
wonderful lady called Gertie Harris, the daughter of an executed soldier,
took the British Ministry of Defence to court: a case that the Ministry of
Defence lost":
SAD
IRL: The Ministry of Defence
did not lose the Farr case as asserted by Mr Mackinlay. The Farr case had
not reached a final conclusion and had not gone forward for a full hearing,
indeed the preliminary opinion of Mr Justice Burnton in the initial
application in May 2005 had already raised the legal bar to any future
action by the British Government/MOD. Rather than resolving the issue the
consequence of the Farr application in May 2005 effectively ruled out the
full pardon option in all WW1 execution cases and any expected British
political response to the
Irish Government Report was re-routed and parked down a legal cul de sac
for nearly two years, thereby taking the pressure off the British Government
at a critical time in the Irish campaign. The introduction of the
PARDONS FOR SERVICEMEN EXECUTED FOR DISCIPLINARY OFFENCES: RECOGNITION AS
VICTIMS OF FIRST WORLD WAR
on the 8th November 2006 is the British Government's official response to
the
Irish Government Report
into the execution of the Irish Shot at Dawn 1914-18, but encumbered
by the limitations set out in the May 2005 opinion of Mr Justice Burnton in
the Farr application. In February 2006, we were advised that the Ministry of
Defence had flatly refused to countenance a pardon for Harry Farr:
See:
The Farr Case - A Cause Célèbre ?
Mackinlay:
"The third
ingredient was a change of Minister. Des Browne, a former Northern Ireland
Minister, known to many people here and now Secretary of State for Defence,
was sympathetic to the issue":
SAD
IRL: Agreed: Des Brown's
humanitarian and exemplary common sense approach was most definitely a key
element alongside the compelling
Report by the Irish Government, which together contributed to a final
resolution of the pardons issue.
Mackinlay:
"The final element was the compelling representations made by the Taoiseach
on behalf of the Irish Republic. The Ministry of Defence knew that, at some
stage, it would have to reply to those representations and that to do so
would be extraordinarily difficult, because the representations were part of
a skilfully and carefully crafted legal submission. I place that on record
and, as someone associated with the campaign, I express my gratitude to the
Government of the Irish Republic for its contribution to remedying that
wrong":
SAD
IRL:
It was the Department of Foreign
Affairs who
compiled and submitted the report and not
the Irish
Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform
as stated by Mr Mackinlay. The
Irish Government's input was a
crucial
element towards
the successful conclusion to the Pardons campaign. Indeed without the
support of the Irish Government there would have been no pardons granted by
the UK.
On the 11th July 2007:
the General Secretary of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) in Great
Britain and Ireland, located in London, concluded in his letter:
"We, perhaps more than others,
are well aware that these pardons would not have been granted if it had not
been for the support of the Irish and the pressure put on Whitehall by their
counterparts in Dublin": See
NUJletter-SADIrl-11July2007:
NOTE:
Significantly, the NUJ comment, is the only UNAMBIGUOUS STATEMENT to
date from British connections which acknowledges the crucial role of the
Irish Government towards the successful achievement of Pardons for all those
executed British soldiers Shot at Dawn during the Great War 1914 to 1918:
Re an Irish Pardon for Irish born British soldiers Shot at Dawn:
On the pretext that such a measure would be persuasive in encouraging a
British Government to look more sympathetically at the pardons issue it was
suggested through an Irish politician on behalf of
Andrew Mackinlay MP at a private meeting with the Minister for Foreign
Affairs just hours before the
Seanad Éireann debate of 28 March 2006,
that the Irish Government should independently proceed and pardon all our
Irish born executed British soldiers irrespective of any British
determination on the matter, effectively calling for an Irish panacea to a
British dilemma prior to any final adjudication in the Farr case and
significantly without consulting with the Irish SAD campaign effort ignoring
our concerns. Those that mooted such a course of action should note the
following. Constitutional obstacles and political sensitivities would have
dictated that any pardon an Irish Government might have considered at that
time would only have effected those Irish executed born in the Republic of
Ireland, would have excluded those executed who were born in Northern
Ireland, would not have effected the soldiers courts martial file it being
held by the Ministry of Defence outside Irish jurisdiction, and taking into
account historical concerns would ultimately have been divisive. Such an
Irish pardon is and was never worth a penny candle and if introduced would
have needlessly jeopardised the interests of our Irish families during a
very sensitive time in the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign. It is to their
inestimable credit that the Irish Government took the advice of the Shot at
Dawn Campaign Irl resisted that pressure, and disregarded UK representations
on behalf of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, a
decision later vindicated by the introduction of the
2006 British Pardons Amendment
the official British Government response to the
2004 Irish Government report.
The
New Zealand Pardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act 2000: A Legal
Prospective
In September 2000 the New Zealand parliament passed into law a Pardons Act
allowing for pardons for 5 New Zealand soldiers executed for alleged
military offences during WW1. The following legal prospective will hopefully
be of assistance:
Does the NZ Pardons Act overturn the original
verdicts of courts-martial ?
The first point is that the
Pardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act 2000
seems to have been deliberately equivocal on the question whether the
original courts-martial verdicts were overturned. Section 4 of the Act
states that its purpose is to pardon five soldiers of the New Zealand
Expeditionary Force who served as volunteers in the Great War and who were
executed in one case for mutiny and the other four for desertion. The second
purpose is to remove, in so far as practicable, the dishonour that the
execution of those five soldiers brought to the soldiers and their families.
When the Act was at its Bill stage it appears there was a deliberate
intention to avoid the possibility of civil proceedings by family members.
So no compensation can be sought. To the extent that the Act differs in its
terms from the previous report made by Sir Edward Somers, the Act takes
precedence. It appears that the Act does not overturn the original verdicts
but attempts, in a unique fashion, to redress the severity of punishment
exacted and the disgrace felt by the soldiers and their families.
Does the NZ Pardons Act create a
conditional pardon ?
A conditional pardon generally substitutes one punishment for another, the
latter a lesser sentence (see the granting of a conditional pardon by royal
prerogative in Lt Tracey's Case 1923, - Note: Lt Tracey's conditional pardon
mitigated his sentence only and did not vacate the original courts-martial
verdict:
Officers Pardoned WW1). The New Zealand Pardons Act cannot be construed
as granting either an unconditional or a conditional pardon and has the
effect as indicated. Whether, if the soldiers were still alive it would be
necessary for them to disclose the courts-martial conviction is a moot
point, but not one now likely to arise as all had been executed. The
ingenuity of the NZ parliamentary draftsman in constructing simple and
straightforward text which does not rewrite the history of the NZ Shot at
Dawn is exemplified unambiguously in their
Pardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act 2000 where it states in the
Preamble:
*
In the Great War, 5 soldiers of the New Zealand Expeditionary force were
executed, after trial by court martial, for certain offences:
*
They were all volunteers;
*
One was executed for the offence of mutiny;
*
The other 4 were executed for the
offence of desertion;
*
Their execution was not a fate that they deserved but was one that resulted
from (a) the harsh discipline that was believed at the time to required; and
(b) the application of the death penalty for military offences, being seen
at that time as an essential part of maintaining military discipline;
*
The execution of those 5 soldiers brought dishonour to both the soldiers
themselves and New Zealand;
*
It is now desired to remove, so far as practicable, the dishonour that the
execution of those 5 soldiers brought to those soldiers and their families;
and set out the Purpose of the Act as:
*
The purpose of this Act is to pardon 5 soldiers of the New Zealand
Expeditionary Force who served as volunteers in the Great War and who were
executed in 1 case for mutiny and in the other 4 cases for desertion; and
*
to remove, so far as practicable, the dishonour that the execution of those
5 soldiers brought to those soldiers and their families
This opinion inter alia corroborates the
following re the New Zealand Pardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act 2000
*
its purpose was not to overturn the original verdicts;
*
its scope and effect is only in so far as practicable,
*
and is limited to the soldiers and offences
stated in the Act, thereby excluding the so called appalling vista scenario
envisaged by the MOD and their support base, i.e. "that the introduction of
pardons on the New Zealand model would open the flood gates".
The Act also stipulated that NZ soldier’s
memory be restored. The restorative memory paragraph put what the New
Zealand Government must do on a parliamentary footing. In Section (C) take
such other steps as, in its opinion, are reasonable or desirable to restore
the memory of the soldiers granted pardons by this Act. As there was New
Zealand parliamentary approval for this measure, it was reasonable in the
circumstances to present medals to the families. (In contrast to ordinary
rank and file soldiers, some British officers had their convictions and
punishments remitted, and were subsequently pardoned and reinstated by Royal
Prerogative and later presented with their medals).
The purpose of the
New Zealand Pardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act 2000 was not to
overturn the original convictions and the Act did not overturn the original
convictions of the NZ Soldiers executed during WW1. In May 2005 Mr Justice
Burnton declared in a judicial review application on behalf of Private Harry
Farr that although the family lacked the legal grounds for a free pardon he
found that there was "room for argument" that he (Private Farr) had been
wrongly refused a conditional pardon. Both the New Zealand Pardon for
Soldiers of the Great War Act September 2000 and the opinion of Mr Justice
Burnton in the Farr case May 2005 have together set the political and legal
parameters for any future British action on the pardons issue. Therefore, it
is envisaged inter alia that the proposed pardons amendment to the Armed
Forces Bill 2006 will not overturn the original convictions of those
executed.
It is unacceptable that the Irish Government's key role and the Shot at Dawn
Campaign Irl effort in bringing about this unique change of British policy
continues to be disregarded by various scribes. As one was closely involved
in the formulation of the Irish Government Report and in the confidential
discussions that followed which led to the widening of the scope of the
British Pardons amendment any erroneous statement or spin placed on the
public record about the separate Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl effort
irrespective of source will be vigorously rebutted. It should be noted that
previous attempts by those involved in the British Shot at Dawn Pardons
Campaign had failed to convince the Irish Government to support the pardons
issue indeed their efforts in the UK had been rejected by the British
government in 1998 when
John Reid MP
then Minister for the Armed Forces
affirmed his belief in military discipline and declared that he would not
grant a generic pardon or permit an independent case-by-case
review.
In contrast, a separate all Ireland 'Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl' unconnected
with the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign set up and based in Dublin
was ultimately successful in persuading the Irish authorities to support the
issue on behalf of the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn, and they in turn persuaded the
British to act through the diplomatic route. Apparently, there are some
individuals, authors and other groups only too willing to claim and
apportion the credit to others ignoring the Irish Campaign effort entirely,
indeed there are still those who credit the success of the Irish SAD
Campaign effort directly to the existence of the British Shot at Dawn
Pardons Campaign which is grossly unfair to our Irish support base.
Consequently in the interests of the historical record we will continue to
rebut misunderstandings or misrepresentations etc about our previous
campaign effort.
The
Farr Case - A Cause Célèbre ?
In a Pro Bono application in May of 2005, Mr Justice Stanley Burnton found
that there was 'room for argument' that he (Private Harry Farr) had been
wrongly refused a conditional pardon. However Mr Justice Burnton also
declared inter alia that the family of Private Farr lacked the legal grounds
for a free pardon......thereby ruling out the *free pardon/full
pardon option in a leading case which many observers believe to be one of
the most deserving of a free pardon/full pardon. Significantly, Mr Justice
Burnton's opinion effectively raised the legal bar by setting a precedent
insofar as future applications for pardons in world war one execution cases
would only be dealt with on the basis of the 'room for argument' principle
via the conditional pardon route...legally capping future British political
outcomes to the pardons issue. Consequently, the legal limitations of the
'room for argument' principle via the conditional pardon route first
enunciated by Mr Justice Burnton in the Farr case in May 2005, are now
reflected in the
2006 British Pardons Amendment..
(*A free pardon/full pardon is understood to mean a pardon not
encumbered by any expressly stated constraint or weighted legal,
parliamentary or royal impediment narrowing its scope or effect).
The Ministry of Defence did not lose the Farr case as asserted by some in
the UK. The Farr case had never reached a final conclusion and had not gone
forward for a full hearing, indeed the preliminary opinion of Mr Justice
Burnton in the initial application in May 2005 had already raised the legal
bar to any future action by the British Government/MoD. Rather than
resolving the issue the consequence of the Farr application in May 2005
effectively ruled out the full pardon option in all WW1 execution cases and
any expected British political response to the
Irish Government Report was re-routed and parked down a British legal
cul de sac for nearly two years, and not several months as previously
stated, thereby taking the pressure off the British Government at a critical
time in the Irish campaign. The introduction of the
PARDONS FOR SERVICEMEN EXECUTED FOR DISCIPLINARY OFFENCES: RECOGNITION AS
VICTIMS OF FIRST WORLD WAR on the 7th November 2006 is the British
Government's official response to the Irish Government Report into the
execution of the Irish Shot at Dawn 1914-18 encumbered by the limitations
set out in May 2005 by Mr Justice Burnton in the Farr application.
It should also be noted that in November 2003
following the initial Irish Government support for the Shot at Dawn Campaign
Irl effort. A meeting took place in Newcastle, England with the leader of
the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign. He gave his assurance that no
legal action was envisaged/considered or being taken in the UK, as to do so
in our opinion, would have frustrated future Irish Government efforts and
divert the Irish campaign down a British legal cul-de-sac. The Irish effort
then proceeded on the basis that no legal action was being taken in the UK
by the Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign or the UK Families. The legal
application in the Farr Case May 2005 (significantly post the presentation
of the Irish Government Report in October 2004) patently breached that
assurance. As a consequence:
1.
the Irish Government Report was
diverted down a British legal cul-de-sac before any political response could
be extracted from the British Government which suited the MoD agenda at the
time;
2.
initiated the 'room for argument' principle via the conditional pardon
route...legally capping future British political outcomes to the pardons
issue;
3.
legally and politically ruled out any chance of ever achieving a full pardon
for our Irish born Shot at Dawn, to the detriment of our Irish families; and
4.
undermined the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign effort.
It is inconceivable that the British Shot at
Dawn Pardons Campaign were unaware of the preparation for the Farr case as
expert knowledge was needed to prepare the legal briefs which was only
accessible through the UK SAD campaign effort. The facts are, the Farr Pro
Bono application in May 2005 is responsible for blocking the full pardon
route for all our world war one Shot at Dawn, thereby eliminating the
possibility of a full pardon for our Irish Shot at Dawn, to the detriment of
our Irish Families, leaving them in a British legal and political vacuum.
The Farr case had never reached a final conclusion or gone forward for a
full hearing to test their legal argument for a conditional pardon, and for
observers in the UK to flag the Farr case as a Cause Célèbre is at the very
least imprudent and a British distortion of the facts.
British connections have also commented:
"For the first time, former War Veterans' Minister Tom Watson has admitted
his meeting with Harris in the summer of 2006 prompted him to force the MoD
to change policy and grant her father and other shell-shocked troops a
pardon". To state or imply that it was this meeting that forced a change
in British Government policy on the WW1 pardons in isolation to all other
efforts, is incredibly naive at best, and downright insulting to all
involved in supporting the campaign for pardons, in particular, the crucial
role of the Irish Government's international diplomatic effort towards the
final resolution of the pardons issue.
In conclusion, but for the input of
Anglo-Irish division department of foreign affairs and the Shot at Dawn
Campaign Irl effort, the support from members of the Oireachtas in Ireland,
support from members of the House of Lords and House of Commons in the UK,
the essential support of various military connections here in Ireland and
abroad, the constructive analysis in books and articles written by
journalists and authors world wide, including the production of various
television documentaries, and importantly, both the British and Irish
government’s priorities were focused at the time on progressing the Northern
Ireland peace process to a successful conclusion, there would have been no
pardons granted in November 2006 for all
306 servicemen executed for military offences during world war one.
On
Tuesday 20th November 2007: the
grandnephew of Private Patrick Joseph Downey one of our 26 Irish Born
soldiers, Shot at Dawn, submitted his application to Her Majesty, The Queen,
for a Royal Pardon for Patrick, stating “In our families opinion, without
the added weight of the royal prerogative of mercy such conditional pardon
is meaningless”
Rejected petition posthumous pardons for WW1 soldiers wrongly accused of
cowardice:
On the 23 March 2013: A petition was
submitted during the 2010–2015 Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition
Government seeking posthumous pardons for WW1 soldiers wrongly accused of
cowardice:
Petition Rejected by the British Government:
Reasoning: It’s about something that the UK
Government or Parliament is not responsible for. In August 2006, the then
Defence Secretary Des Browne announced that with Parliament's support, there
would be a general pardon for all 306 men executed in World War One. A new
law passed on November 8th 2006 and included as part of the Armed Forces Act
has pardoned men in the British and Commonwealth armies who were executed in
World War One. The law removes the stain of dishonour with regards to
executions on war records. This petition has been rejected as HM Government
has already dealt with this issue.
LINKS
●
24 September 2001:
Shot at Dawn Memorial Grove: National Memorial Arboretum,
Alrewas, UK:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQIfhS9NrhA&feature=youtu.be
●
11 December 2003:
Dail Debates – (Irish) Shot at Dawn Campaign:
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2003-12-11/20/
●
17 February 2004:
“Irish
Shot at Dawn Campaign Petition Launched” Article by Journalist
Andrew Bushe:
●
21 March 2004:
The Guardian:
UK acts to clear shot Irish troops: Files switch raises pardons hope
after First World War: executions:
●
28 April 2004:
“Different Spanks for Different Ranks”
by Journalist Andrew Bushe:
●
02 May 2004:
Ireland on Sunday: One Law for the Lions, Another Law for the Donkeys:
Peter Day, Ireland on Sunday:
●
24 October 2004:
The Times (London):
Comment by Sue Denham: Shot at Dawn campaign moves closer to clearing
executed men:
●
October 2004:
Report into the Execution of the 26 Irishmen Shot at Dawn
by the British Army during WW1: Department of Foreign Affairs Dublin:
●
13 November 2004:
The Guardian: Pardon plea for Irish volunteers shot in trenches:
Relatives appeal to Blair over soldiers who suffered rough justice in
first world war:
●
17 November 2004:
Dail Debates: Execution of Irish Born Soldiers:
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2004-11-17/212/
●
Jan/Feb
2005:
History Ireland:
Shot-at-Dawn-justice-does-not-have-an-expiry-date:
●
11 November 2005:
Irish Times:
“Shared history can build a shared future” by Dermot Ahern TD, Irish
Minister for Foreign Affairs:
●
28 and 29 November 2005:
British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body: Thirty-First Plenary Conference
Edinburgh: At the request of the Shot
at Dawn Campaign Irl: Pardons issue raised by Irish members Senator
Brian Hayes FG and Senator Paschal Mooney FF at the Edinburgh meeting of
the British-Irish Inter-parliamentary Body:
●
29 March 2006:
Irish Times:
Ahern to press UK on pardons for shot soldiers:
●
05 November 2006:
Irish Independent:
Official pardon at last for 26 Irish soldiers 'shot at dawn':
●
08 November 2006:
RTE TV News: Minister Ahern TD welcomes Pardons for Irishmen:
https://www.rte.ie/news/2006/1108/82305-pardon/
●
08 November 2006:
Service Personnel (Men and Boys) Executed for Military Offences during
WW1 Pardoned:
THE SHOT AT DAWN:
●
10 November 2006:
RTE TV: Irish Shot at Dawn: ‘Seoige and O’Se’ interview with Peter
Mulvany Coordinator Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl and Christy Walshe
Grandnephew of Irish Shot at Dawn Soldier Private Patrick Joseph Downey.
In November 2006 the British Government, with the support of the Irish
Government, initiated pardoning legislation effecting those Shot at Dawn
for military offences during the great war. YOUTUBE:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-UOZEcgAGY&feature=youtu.be
FACEBOOK:
https://fb.watch/42HK5qqkjk/
●
December 2006: Issue 36:
Dublin Bus Magazine- Fighting For Pardon:
●
December
2006:
Empire State Hibernian: Newsletter
published Quarterly by the New York State Board Ancient Order of
Hibernians in America: At pages 5 + 6 a contribution by Historian Mike
McCormack on the Irish Shot at Dawn:
●
Jan/Feb 2007:
History Ireland:
Shot at Dawn Campaign:
●
11 November 2007:
French Honour Irish Born WW1 Soldier Shot at Dawn: Video:
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1670340466554708&extid=RNnhNnqk4vlU6cUn
●
10 November 2008:
10.35pm: 1918 Would You
Believe: Shot At Dawn: RTÉ TELEVISION FACTUAL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erDhyIJR5lg
The Would You Believe team look at the tragic death of 26 Irish soldiers
who were "shot at dawn" on the battlefield by the British army during
World War 1 for various offences.
https://presspack.rte.ie/2008/11/10/1918-would-you-believe-shot-at-dawn/
Other Links:
https://www.facebook.com/SADIrl/videos/1670608076527947/?t=0
Irish WW1 General Guilty of Desertion:
British Army Officers Pardoned by the King WW1:
Bibliography:
Death sentences passed by courts of the British Army 1914-1924:
Shot at Dawn: Executions in WWI by
Authority of the British Army Act:
●
18 November 2014 -
Dublin - Remembering the Shot at Dawn 1914-18:
As 2014
commemorated the 100th Anniversary of the beginning of the Great War, it
was deemed an appropriate time to remember those who were executed and
subsequently pardoned in 2006. Consequently, on Tuesday 18th November
2014 at approximately 10.15 hrs journalist Mr George MacIntyre
accompanied by his wife Nancy, along with Mr Derek Dunne, a relative,
and a retired member of the Irish Defence Forces, visited the Irish
National War Memorial Gardens in Islandbridge, Dublin, and placed a
wreath on behalf of the National Union of Journalists of Great Britain
and Ireland at the altar stone, in memory of all the Shot at Dawn
1914-1918. The Wreath Inscription reads as follows: "Remembrance: “What
we do for ourselves alone dies with us, what we do for others and the
world remains and is immortal “- Albert Pine: Your sacrifice will never
be forgotten as long as we remain to speak on your behalf ( The National
Union of Journalists (Great Britain and Ireland)". Piper Stefan O'Reilly
formerly with the Irish defence Forces piped two laments and Ode to the
Fallen was recited in several languages, including Irish. George was
formerly deputy night editor of the Newcastle Journal and when secret
court martial papers were made available in 1990 by the British
government, it was his article about the executions of young under age
soldiers that instigated the Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign in the UK.
The Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl launched in 2002 along with the Shot at
Dawn Pardons Campaign in the UK, and with the support of Foreign Affairs
in Dublin, together persuaded the British Government to introduce a
resolution to the Pardons issue in 2006. The addendum to the Irish WW1
records now contains the names of our 26 Irish Shot at Dawn. (a copy
donated to the War Memorial is on display in the book rooms). Throughout
the campaign effort it was the NUJ and their members in Ireland, the UK
and Journalist’s worldwide who continually spoke up for those who lie in
peaceful silence on the various battlefields of World War One. It was
their constructive analysis which contributed to the successful
conclusion of the Shot at Dawn Campaign effort in 2006. Gratitude is
expressed to Journalists, members of the National Union of Journalists
of Great Britain and Ireland, and all writers of record for their valued
contribution which assisted the WORLDWIDE TEAM EFFORT to effectively
turn British Military History on its head. Many historians and
commentators said the British Government would never move on the issue.
Shot at Dawn Campaigners proved the impossible was possible. |
|
Peter Mulvany BCL, HDip Arts Admin,
Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46)
Email:
mulvanypeterie@yahoo.co.uk
|
|