Modernising Internment

Posted by Jim on July 16, 2017

————————————————————
A look at the evolution of internment, from a speech delivered by
National PRO of Republican Network for Unity, Nathan Stuart, at a picket
organised by the Anti-Internment Group For Ireland (AIGI).
————————————————————

The Introduction of Internment in the August of 1971 is one of the most
widely known examples of collective punishment in Irish history. It was
ham-fisted to say the least, mass arrests, out of date intelligence and
until February 1973 no loyalists were detained by the measure. The wide
scale nature of Internment, the indifference towards needing any
substantial or credible evidence, the safeguarding of pro state loyalist
terrorists and the subsequent brutality of the interrogations that
followed, as was piloted on the 14 internees which would become known as
the hooded men. All these overt, coercive tactics are the culminating
factors of British Army primacy in security and ample opposition to
these measures was forthcoming .

The primacy of the British Army represented a state of destabilization,
a failed state and as desirable as the criminalisation of republican
prisoners had been during the blanket protest and subsequent hunger
strikes. The British government required the same for their counter
insurgency outside the prisons. The criminalisation of Irish
republicanism as a whole and on a societal scale required a normalised
approach to combating anti-state actors, violent and nonviolent. Simply
put, the transition from overt army primacy, to covert intelligence led
“rule of law” stratagems. Through the use of special branch and MI5 and
aided by their 26 county counterparts, this is the preferred method in
which the British state quells political dissent and it has proven much
more effective in terms of preventing public outrage and opposition. It
has in fact, through its insidious covert application, normalized
internment in Ireland today.

It is no exaggeration that the legal institutions of the northern state
have been weaponised, a quote from the infamous Brigadier Frank Kitson
unashamedly directs us to this conclusion, he states “the Law should be
used as just another weapon in the government’s arsenal, and in this
case it becomes little more than a propaganda cover for the disposal of
unwanted members of the public. For this to happen efficiently, the
activities of the legal services have to be tied into the war effort in
as discreet a way as possible”. The desired effect that legal
flexibility in culmination with sociological criminalisation is to allow
for any political actor deemed a threat to the state and it’s narrative
to be removed thereafter without risk of destabilisation. Selective
detention when the incorporation of a hostile, defamatory media is taken
into account, provides the state with the ability to, as Kitson desired,
dispose of “unwanted” members of the public.

No greater example of the hypocrisy of the complicit judiciary exists
today than that of the brainchild of Kenneth Diplock, the non-jury
courts. Established in the North on the 8th August 1973 and officially
abolished ten years ago, the continuation of these farcical trials by
subsequent British secretary of states is not only politically
convenient for the British state but highlight that the Northern state
has no desire to normalise that which works in its security favour, the
retaining of a system which can only rationally be viewed as
conveyer-belt justice has and will continue to be used to secure long
periods of remand and with the additional factor of secret evidence,
convictions, the chance of a fair hearing under this system is virtually
non-existent.

One such example of the legal system’s deficit, is the case of Cogus
prisoner and former national chairperson of RNU Carl Reilly, though his
case is not in isolation. Remanded to Maghaberry prison 20th October
2015, after being charged with membership of a proscribed organisation &
directing terrorism, as a result of a Gardai surveillance operation in
February 2015 at a Hotel in County Louth. Those who carried out the
surveillance operation and gathered the evidence later acknowledged that
it was of poor quality and the evidence largely circumstantial, despite
this the PSNI adopted the case and making full use of the legal
ambiguities of the North’s judiciary, desire to secure a conviction on
evidence that was deemed inadmissible by the very same body which
carried out the surveillance operation.

Carl’s case is but one of a plethora of injustices, the accusation of
living in the past that is so often levied at republicans rings hollow
when the very same Machiavellian tactics that were justified at the peak
of the recent conflict remain in place in 2017. The attack on the right
to liberty, the right to freely organise and retain a political opinion
without fear of coercion is an attack not only on the individual but on
the very ideology itself. This hostility is the result of the residual
imperialistic worldview of Westminster politicians and at a time when
Britain becomes increasingly irrelevant on a world stage, economically
and militarily, with growing demands for independence from Scotland and
now the increasingly precarious position Britain faces with Brexit, the
risk of an anti-imperialist republicanism growing in the empire’s
backyard would be an intolerable development.

As previously stated this strategy to quell political dissent is the
removal of political agitators that pose a risk to the state, whether
this be an effective organiser, a charismatic orator, political bridge
builder or an insightful policymaker, any individual that displays a
capability is at risk. Article 5 of the Human Right’s act has been
categorically and repeatedly disregarded to secure the imprisonment of
republicans for years at a time, arbitrary detention is the norm for
these unwanted persons. As such the only rational response is both
exposure and encouragement;

To expose this systemic injustice, loud and often. To inject energy and
enthusiasm into a campaign to bring to light the weaponization of the
judiciary and demand an end to extensive delays for hearings, secret
evidence and diplock courts.

We must also actively encourage the development of participatory
resistance. That as many as possible are encouraged to rally behind
calls against selective detention, politically motivated arrest and
internment. This is an arduous task, at a time of public apathy and
misinformation it will often be thankless but the onus is on the people
gathered here today to motivate ourselves and like minded progressives,
to push ourselves to expose the latest evolution of internment to the
wider public and push this hereditary injustice once again to the
forefront of the minds of the Irish people.