Brits Receive Report on 26 Irish Soldiers
'Shot at Dawn'
Special to The Irish American Post
The Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dermot Ahern, T.D., on Oct.
28, announced that a Report into the courts-martial and execution of twenty-six
Irish soldiers by the British Army during World War 1 has been formally
submitted to the British Government through the Embassy of Ireland, London.
In making this announcement, the Minister said in particular that:
"Although concerns have been publicly raised by the families of the
victims, notable military historians, and many members of Parliament and
the public on this sensitive issue for many years, this Report is the first
instance in which the courts-martial and execution of the 26 Irish soldiers
has been extensively evaluated."
"The files describe a military system of justice that ignored clear
evidence of medical afflictions and extenuating circumstances in favor
of the need of the upper ranks to impose an exemplary disciplinarian regime
on the rank and file in an effort to deter others from contemplating a
similar crime. Executing a soldier in such circumstances must be seen as
clearly unjust, and not deserving of the ultimate penalty."
The Minister also drew attention to the apparent disparity in the treatment
of Irish soldiers. "For so many of those recruited in Ireland to be condemned
to death indicates a disciplinary approach markedly harsher than that faced
by men from other countries. In fact, the number of Irish soldiers condemned
to death by courts-martial during WW1 represents 8% of the total number
of condemnations, while the number of Irish troops corresponds to only
approximately 2% of the British Army numbers at the time."
The Minister concluded by asking the British Government to revisit the
issue in a humanitarian and compassionate manner. "As we approach the 90th
anniversary of the outbreak of the Great War, and the world prepares to
once again remember those who sacrificed so much during those terrible
years of trench warfare, a retrospective action by the British Government
to redress the condemnation of those 'shot at dawn' would be widely welcomed,
both in Ireland and further afield."
"The overwhelming level of support in Ireland, across political and
religious divides North and South, has convinced me that a resolution to
this matter would not only be of great comfort to the families of the men
involved - which is our priority - but would also reflect positively on
the already close relationship between Ireland and Great Britain, especially
in the context of the respective attitudes toward the First World War."
The Shot at Dawn (Ireland) Campaign, coordinated by Peter Mulvany, lobbied
the Irish Government to support is call to the British Government to pardon
retrospectively 306 British soldiers executed during World War 1 for military
offenses. Twenty-six of these soldiers are believed to be from Ireland
and the offenses under which they were sentenced to death and subsequently
executed were repealed in 1928 and 1930.
A thorough review of the issue identified a number of supportive points
for the objectives of the Shot at Dawn Campaign. The then Minister for
Foreign Affairs, Brian Cowen, T.D., announced Government support for the
Campaign on Nov. 14, 2003. A meeting at official level with the British
Ministry of Defense subsequently took place in London on Feb. 6, 2004,
to discuss the matter with a view to finding a satisfactory resolution.
It was agreed at this meeting that the British side would forward the
courts-martial files of the 25 Irish soldiers in their possession (the
other courts-martial file is in the possession of the Canadian authorities),
and the Irish side would review these documents and submit an official
paper on the matter. The review of these files corroborate the argument
in favor of retrospective pardons for the men in question on a number of
fronts:
-
The offenses under which each soldier was executed, such as desertion,
striking an officer and disobedience, were the subject of much parliamentary
discourse as early as 1915, and intensified until 1928 and 1930 when the
Government repealed the death penalty for these particular offenses.
This indicates the level of parliamentary and public uneasiness
surrounding these executions at the time of the war, and dispels the notion
that today's standards are being used to judge the past. The closure of
the case files of those shot at dawn for 75 years by the British military
also indicates an awareness of the sensitivity which was afforded the matter
in the aftermath of the war.
-
The courts-martial files indicate a trend among the accused of a lack of
even a rudimentary understanding of their rights under military law. The
absence of a 'prisoner's friend' in the majority of cases, to safeguard
those rights, further undermines the assertion that those facing courts-martial
were afforded their legally entitled rights.
-
A comparison of recruitment figures and subsequent death sentences suggests
a disparity in the treatment of Irish soldiers in comparison with those
from other countries in the British army. For example, the number of men
recruited in Ireland was similar to that of New Zealand, however there
were 10 times the level of condemnations in the Irish regiments despite
the New Zealand regiments being notoriously harsh with discipline.
-
The treatment of the lower ranks at courts-martial, in comparison to officers
and higher ranks, indicates a degree of class bias that is incompatible
with an impartial system of justice. The treatments meted out to officers
and upper echelons tended to be at the lower end of the disciplinary scale,
whereas lower ranks were often afforded little, if any, leniency.
-
The revelation that King George V retrospectively pardoned those in the
higher ranks both during and after the war following petitions and appeals
signed by military personnel with significant influence, further demonstrates
this partiality.
-
The case files include some shocking
omissions by those presiding at courts-martial with regard to medical ailments
and extenuating circumstances. In a number of cases there is clear evidence
of ignoring medical conditions and personal circumstances that may have
accounted for the actions of the accused, and could reasonably have been
interpreted as mitigating factors.
-
The confirmation process presents clear evidence that some soldiers were
executed for example, to deter others from committing a similar crime,
and not because they deserved their fate. Frequent character references
as to the fighting qualities of the accused, although not always recorded,
were sufficiently common to assume they hindered the possibility of receiving
leniency from those in a position to confirm, or commute, the sentence.
The cross community Bill in the House of Commons in 1999, sponsored by
Ian Paisley and John Hume, demonstrates the depth of feeling of both sides
of the community in Ireland, north and south, with regard to the treatment
of those executed.
 
|
|