Chris Heaton-Harris claims Britain is pushing its Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill “to achieve better outcomes” in legacy cases. Certainly the British will expect to achieve better outcomes from their appointed commission than those they get at inquests like Ballymurphy, Ombudsman investigations such as Operation Achille, civil cases like the Miami Showband lawsuit, or criminal trials like the McAnespie verdict.
One can only imagine how bad the outcomes might get if Britain ever allowed a genuine Historical Investigations Unit, along lines prescribed in European Court cases and promised in the Stormont House Agreement.
There is no mystery why so little progress has been made in erasing the legacy backlog, 25 years after Good Friday Agreement promises to honour victims by vindicating the human rights of all. If the British government wanted legacy truth, it would not need inquests to uncover whether British troopers had opened fire without justification at Springhill, or New Lodge. They would not need an Ombudsman investigation to tell them where payments were made to British agents and informers involved in collusion murders. It would not need a Barnard Review to discover if out of bounds notices were given to clear crown patrols so that the Glenanne killers could carry out murder and escape.
Victims’ relatives have persisted because they are confident their claims are true. The British government fought them at every turn. Deny the truth, until the truth becomes undeniable. Delay legacy inquests, ombudsman reports or other legal paths to justice, until no further delays are possible. Wait for survivors, eyewitnesses or close family members to die, and hope others lose heart. Block progress in legacy cases, and then claim the lack of progress proves no progress can be made.
Meanwhile British officials keep repeating that crown forces were responsible for only 10 per cent of the north’s killings, washing their hands of joint enterprise complicity in collusion murders by paid agents. Whenever justice breaks through, these officials lament with hollow words like “vexatious prosecutions” or “rewriting history,” as if it were annoying or unfair that victims, like those of the Ballymurphy Massacre, be exonerated from the smears used to justify their murder.
The Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill should be understood as Britain’s admission of guilt. British officials know the facts and are afraid to face the verdicts of their own courts, inquests, Ombudsmen etc. They must change the rules, so Britain can get better outcomes in spite of the facts.
Albert Einstein is believed to have said that “insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results”.
It does not take a genius to see it would be crazy for victims’ relatives to give up their rights to every legal channel that has worked for them, and trust a commission set up by the same British government that has tried to deny them truth at every turn.
Portrait of Theobald Wolfe Tone, brother to William Henry Tone. PUBLIC DOMAIN
In an earlier article for IrishCentral, this author has written about the fascinating life of Irishman George Thomas, who went on to create his Kingdom in the Indian state of Haryana.
Thomas was one amongst many European military adventurers who wanted to avail the increasing opportunities offered by the military labour market of Maratha Empire in South Asia.
Marathas, cognisant of the rising political ambitions of the Europeans in general and the British in particular on the horizon, were on a mission to modernise their army.
In order to Europeanise their army, Marathas recruited several Europeans, amongst them was Irishman William Henry Tone, who not just became a warrior of Maratha Empire but also a scholar.
Tone’s “Illustrations of some Institutions of the Mahratta People,” published in Calcutta in 1818, has frequently been quoted by writers on Indian matters, notably by Grant Duff, who, in his great “History of the Mahrattas,” refers appreciatively to the work of Tone: “I have examined minutely all which this intelligent gentle man wrote respecting the Mahrattas. What he saw may be relied upon…”
Let’s learn more about the life of this Irishman.
Sign up to IrishCentral’s newsletter to stay up-to-date with everything Irish!Subscribe to IrishCentral
Irishman Tone
William Henry Tone, born in August 1764, was the brother of Theobold Wolfe Tone, an Irish republican and revolutionary who sought to overthrow English rule in Ireland and led a French military force to Ireland during the insurrection of 1798.
ADVERTISING
William’s grandfather happened to be a respectable farmer near Naas, in County Kildare, and his father a coach-maker, who was ruined by litigation over the family property.
Tone was intended for a commercial life and bound apprentice at the age of 14 to an eminent bookseller. This enabled him to indulge his passion for reading, and he perused every book of voyages and travels that he could find, and also some of military history and adventure. The books he read inspired him for a life of adventure.
He wanted to go to India, so he ran away to London to join the English East India Company which had a presence in India. Instead of being sent to India, he was sent to St. Helena for garrison duty, but even there he read.
When he met his brother Wolfe Tone after a gap of eight years, his brother was surprised by his gentlemanly mannerisms and knowledge of the best parts of English literature. When Wolfe got to know about William’s wish to go to India he did not stop him. It is said where this is will there is a way, William in the year 1792 reached Madras in India.
ADVERTISING
In India
From Madras, William went to Calcutta, and from there, he went to serve the Nizam of Hyderabad, King of a successor Turkic state to the Mughal Empire. Nizam’s Kingdom was located in the Deccan region of India.
Later, in 1796, William, aged 32, was given a colonel’s commission in the corps commanded by an American adventurer named Boyd thanks to the recommendation of Major Palmer, resident at the court of Prime Minster (Peshwa) of the Maratha Empire in Poona.
Two years later, he was selected by Amrat Rao, the Peshwa’s brother, to command a proposed brigade of regular infantry, all the officers of which were to be British subjects, but the idea was abandoned.
William later fought for a man named Lakwa Dada against Scindia Maratha in 1802 at the defence of Soundra, but was defeated by Scindia’s French commander Perron.
As per Herbert Crompton, Scindia’s commander Frenchman Perron acted very kindly with William and supplied him and his officers a handsome camp equipage, such as tents, camels, horses, etc. To Colonel Tone, he offered a commission in Scindia’s army, which offer was courteously declined. Scindia then enabled him to retire to Holkar’s capital, there to remain, and furnished him with 10,000 rupees for his expenses and to enable him and his companions to recover their shattered fortunes. Holkar was a member of Maratha Empire like Scindia, both Scindia and Holkar had fought for Marathas as comrade-in-arms but also fought against each other to establish their supremacy within the Maratha Empire, which was one of the reasons for the fall of this mighty edifice.
Serving under Holkar, William was killed in 1802 by a bullet in the right temple in the storming of a fort near Choli Maheshwar (now in Madhya Pradesh state). He was buried just outside Poona in a small Christian graveyard for officers in the Peshwa’s service.
William observed Maratha Empire keenly and wrote down about it as mentioned before. The term “Military Republic” was used for it by him. As per Surendranath Sen in his book “Administrative System of The Marathas,” this is true only in one sense that the meanest soldier, if he had ability, could logically expect to be a Sardar of the empire.
About the capital of Maratha Empire Satara, William wrote, “The country circumjacent to Sattarah (The descendant of Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaja founder of Maratha Empire, lived here) enjoys an exemption from military depredations of all kinds; and whenever any chief enters this district, all the ensigns of royalty are laid aside, and the nagara (Kind of a drum) or the great drum of the empire ceases to beat.”
The Metropolitan Police at Poona became a model body during the administration of the last of the Peshwas. The efficiency and honesty of this body had extorted the applause of critics like Elphinstone and William Henry Tone.
As per Sen, Tone says, “It is little remarkable for anything but its excellent Police which alone employs thousand men.
“After the firing of the gun, which takes place at ten at night, no person can appear in the streets without being taken up by the Patroles, and detained prisoner until dismissed in the morning by the Kotwal.
“So strict is the discipline observed that the Peshwa himself had been kept prisoner a whole night for being out at improper hours.”
William mentioned about Scindia’s firelocks: “His are very excellent ones far superior to the ordinary European arms to be met with in the Bazars.”
The author of this article works as a consultant with Scindia Marathas. Maharaja Mahadji Scindia was the pioneer amongst the Marathas in the modernisation and Europeanisation of his army.
The people-to-people connection between India and Ireland is very old and deep, all the ambassadors of friendship between these two countries need to study it more indeed, especially when Taoiseach Leo Varadkar is a man of Indo-Irish ancestry.
The Ancient Order of Hibernians is continuing its critical broadsides against the British government’s legacy bill.
In a statement, AOH National President Daniel O’Connell said that Northern Ireland Secretary Chris Heaton-Harris had stated that the U.K. Government plans to continue its “ill advised pursuit” of the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill, restoring to the bill provisions that would provide an amnesty for murder and torture, halt current and future investigations, and deny victims access to the courts.
Said O’Connell: “This action contravenes Britain’s pledged commitments under the Good Friday Agreement and the norms of justice of civilized societies, including the basic principles of the Magna Carta, which holds that no one is above the law.
The Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill has achieved the rare distinction of unifying the major political parties of Northern Ireland in opposition, parties that currently can not agree to form a government.
“The Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, U.N. Special Rapporteurs, national human rights institutions, parliamentary committees, members of the U.S. House and Senate, and civil society organizations, including victims’ groups, have all denounced this bill. A recent poll reported that nine in 10 U.K. adults said perpetrators should still be prosecuted for serious crimes even if they were committed decades ago.
:Only one group favors this legislation: those who wish to hide their misdeeds in the shadows of injustice and airbrush from history the true nature of the British Government’s activities in Northern Ireland.
“It is no coincidence that this legislation was announced in the Queen’s Speech on the very day a British Coroner’s court found that the ten civilians killed by members of the British Parachute Regiment were ‘completely innocent.’
“Nine days later, then Prime Minister Boris Johnson apologized ‘unreservedly on behalf of the U.K. government for the events that took place in Ballymurphy and the huge anguish that the lengthy pursuit of truth has caused the families of those killed.’ Prime Minister Johnson concluded that ‘No apology can lessen [the victims’] lasting pain.’
“Yet that is, at most, what the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill would offer the victims of Ballymurphy and the families of hundreds of victims of violence perpetrated by Crown forces: an apology.
“Even the possibility of families getting that modicum of relief is questionable as the bill is based on the wildly optimistic belief that those who have reached old age, having lived lives of stolen valor with medals on their chests and various honors after their names, will now have pangs of conscience and confess. Professor Pangloss and Pollyanna would be skeptical of the success of such a process.
“The U.K. often seeks to leverage what it perceives to be a ‘Special Relationship”‘ between the United Kingdom and the United States, a relationship built on ‘common language, ideals, and democratic practices.’ Granting an amnesty for murder and denying victims access to the judicial system are not American ideals.
“The Ancient Order of Hibernians calls upon all elected U.S. leaders to denounce the U.K.’s legacy bill; to remain silent is not the act of a friend but the actions of an accessory after the fact. If the Sunak government persists in this bill, the United States must reevaluate and reconsider ‘the special relationship.'”
In a 300-page report, the Constitution Unit of University College London has reviewed how the GFA has worked out over the past quarter century. It used party manifestoes and focus group and elite group interviews to deliver a sober account which is necessarily an outsider’s product. No bad thing if it succeeds in creating greater attention in London in particular.
We are acutely aware that few politicians in Great Britain today have invested much time in understanding Northern Ireland’s politics deeply. The same can also be said to a large degree in Dublin. Within Northern Ireland, meanwhile, as is true in any polarised context, there is some tendency for all sides to ‘other’ those with different perspectives, rather than to seek to understand why others think as they do…
The consensus that the Agreement is ‘the only game in town’ for Northern Ireland’s future still holds, but it has been shaken, and there are widespread, if often undefined, calls for reform.
Many interviewees expressed worries that, while the Agreement has brought tremendous improvements in terms of greater peace and enhanced prosperity, some parts of society have largely missed out on those gains. Concerns about parts of the loyalist community were particularly widespread. Some interviewees, despite seeing a need for reform, worried that any attempt to amend one part of the Agreement could cause others to unravel as well.
In all eight of our focus groups – which spanned across Northern Ireland’s nationalist, republican, unionist, loyalist, and non-aligned communities – participants expressed deep anger that, during the suspension of the institutions, Northern Ireland’s politicians continued to be paid while, as participants saw it, not doing their jobs. This fed a deep sense that politicians were a class apart who served their own interests. Most people focused primarily on day-to-day issues – the cost of living and quality of public services – not constitutional issues, and they wanted politicians to get on with delivering on matters such as healthcare and education.
Most supported the GFA in principle, but harder-line unionists, who were overwhelmingly hostile to the Agreement. They returned again and again throughout the discussion to the idea that the Agreement was about the release of paramilitary prisoners – which they strongly resented. The other group comprised loyalists. They had supported the Agreement initially, but had become increasingly disillusioned. They expressed a deep sense of betrayal by the British government, which they thought had no understanding of their lives.
Constitutional issues and Brexit
Beyond the basic question of whether they wanted Northern Ireland to remain in the UK or become part of a united Ireland, most interviewees did not have developed thoughts. Most agreed that a ‘border poll’ was not an immediate prospect, though Brexit had disrupted many assumptions about the likelihood of a united Ireland… We also asked interviewees for their thoughts on the current constitutional set-up within the UK and whether it should be changed. Views on this were even less defined than they were on Irish unity.
… we note the recurring concern that both London and Dublin have disengaged from Northern Ireland affairs and that, without re-engagement, progress on many matters will be difficult. Politicians, former officials, and academics were all keen to emphasise this point.
.
The report concludes by highlighting four key points…, An elite consensus – which we share – holds that the Agreement is ‘the only game in town’ for Northern Ireland’s future. Second, however, while most members of the wider public in Northern Ireland accept that consensus view, some do not…
Third, while the Agreement provides the framework, there is general agreement that change is needed: that the status quo is not sustainable…
Finally, however, there is also fear of change: fear that things will get worse rather than better, that the ‘other side’ will gain while one’s own side loses. Change is needed, but change needs trust. In order to make progress in the coming years, political leadership from London, Dublin, and the major political parties will have a vital role in rebuilding trust. That will require them, above all, to listen, and to work by the Agreement’s ethos of respecting difference, sharing power, and seeking consensual ways forward.
The Report doesn’t attempt to get under the skin. It focuses on how the Agremeent is treated without describing how sections of it are politically weaponised by one party or another. It avoids value judgements. The word “sectarian” is unused. There is little about blood and guns here or a search for ulterior motives. Although they would be more revealing than anything else, the inside stories of manoeuvring in the Assembly and Executive which produced the failed attempts of Fresh Start and New Decade, New Approach will have to wait for another day.
For all that politics is obsessed by the constitutional questions the authors were struck by the lack of substance in the cases for both Unity and even more so, the Union. Here is a paradox. The Assembly and the GFA retaining the constitutional link must be the basis of the case for the Union even though nationalists are supporting the Assembly and the DUP are boycotting it. Because nationalists are assumed to be comfortable with the three stranded Agreement, the report paid little attention to them. Loyalist rejection of the GFA only makes perverse sense is if it is part of a wrecking strategy to put people off unity. But it will never be strong enough as to constitute a veto. Majority opinion could just as easily go the other way.
Analysis by itself will never be been enough. If you’re still analysing, you’re not deciding. The time to work on prescriptions has come. The NI civil service should confront the parties with a list of crucial decisions that only ministers can take. “Reform” is mooted but not developed. Almost certainly a super majority would be a favour of easing the straightjacket of the mutual veto. Here the argument is circular as it is for trust. Without trust you cannot reform; but reform is needed to produce trust. The British government should cease their infernal teasing and join with Dublin to champion the cause of both. The obstacles to intergovernmental cooperation are gradually being removed. The Windsor Framework may yet soften the disastrous impact of Brexit. Joint authority is a unionist bogey. Pressure for reform can easily be accommodated within the GFA framework. The UK government have in fact been more interventionist than they’re given credit (or blamed) for. Consider the ill- fated backstop, the framework, the order to implement abortion, support for Irish culture. But Westminster should be more consisitent in excercising devolved powers, within a framework of time and pressure to restore the Assembly.
Grounds might be prepared for a new Stormont conference for the stakeholders; but this is difficult to imagine before the next UK and Irish elections unless the DUP were to return quickly to the Assembly. Sinn Fein in government north and south would prove a challenge to all parties including themselves. Either way, internal reform at Stormont should not be long delayed. For the moment let the wider future take care of itself. If the nearer future is not better cared for, the outlook will be bleak.
