Fortnight Publications Ltd.

Army InterrogationAuthor(s): Terence O'BrienSource: Fortnight, No. 27 (Oct. 29, 1971), pp. 6-7Published by: Fortnight Publications Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25543767 .

Accessed: 24/06/2014 21:35

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Fortnight Publications Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Fortnight.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Tue, 24 Jun 2014 21:35:08 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

6

gunning down a terrorist who was not

caught red handed, unless there was

iimminent danger of him using firearms to resist arrest. Nor would there by any justification for shooting down a man

simply because he was engaged in unlawful activities, like breaking into a bank or robbing someone. The law there

is that the police or anyone else has a duty to use what force" is necessary to arrest the

man or prevent him escaping. There might

just be a case for shooting a man in the leg to. prevent him running off in a serious

case, but not for killing him. It is for the courts and not the security forces to mete

out punishment for crimes of this kind. Some conclusions

The Army has not releasedf the text of the card issued to soldiers. There is no reason to believe that it does not conform to these principles, though there is some talk of distinction being drawn between institutional and private property, whoch

could certainly not be justified on the

existing caselaw. But equally there is not reason to believe that mistakes cannot and

have not been made by individual soldiers in applying those rules. The Newry incidentas it has been reported is clearly a case in point. The proper course in such

cases of doubt is tor the matter to be

adjudged by an independent court. The difficulty is getting a case before such a court. That is the reason why there must be a coroners inquest in any case of death.

Unfortunately the law on coroners

inquests in Northern Ireland unlike that elsewhere forbids any verdict but an open verdict. So no recommendation for criminal or civil proceedings can be made, and it is left to the police and the attorney general to decide on the evidence produced. We need an independent public prosecutor to decide on matters of this kind. The government has promised to provide one. But if the present spate of

shootings is not to join the already long list of cased in which the suspicion of

unjustified or excessive reaction by the security forces has been left to fester we need an independent prosecutor, or better still a permanent independent judicial tribunal to hear such cases and to

pronounce on them, that is to pronounce on whether there is a prima facie case for

legal proceedings. The alternative is a slide into martial lawlessness in which the activities of the security forces differ only in degree from those the terrorists. It

happened in the 1920s.

Army Interrogation Terence O'Brien

It was during the Stalinist show trial of the 'Thirties' that the West first became alerted to the possibility that forms of

"persuasion" were being used that were

directed not at the body but at the mind. The post-war pictures and reports of

Cardinal Stepinac admitting publicly to fantastic crimes seemed to confirm what

had been long suspected.But it was not

until the Korean war that citizens of

America and the United Kingdom were

subjected in significant numbers to this

technique. It has been suggested by a number of writers that it was while a

prisoner in Korea that Blake was

successfully brainwashed. After Korea the British forces interested themselves in these techniques for offensive and

defensive reasons.Another prisoner in

Korea was a certain Captain Anthony

Farrar-Hockley. The account of his

experiences show a man of character,

courage and audacity who was destined to

rise to the top in his profession. I quote from his book, "The Edge of the Sword."

"My mind could not conceive the truth

that my senses offered. We were standing in a small square room, with cement-faced

walls and a concrete floor . ... . . As I

stripped off my filthy, lousy, shirt and

jersey, I knew that I was in a torture

chamber. Yet my mind could not conceive

it. I was living in the twentieth century? the year A.D. nineteen hundred and fifty

one.Surely these three men could never

bring themselves to torture me in coid blood. Looking around at their faces, I saw neither passion nor compassion in any one of them." P. 183/4.

Twenty years later members of the forces serving in Northern Ireland, over

which the same Farrar-Hockley (now Lieut. General) had recently relinquished command, stand accused of physical torture and brainwashing tactics. The

alleged physical tortures measure up to

anything which Farrar-Hockley attributed to Chinese and Koreans.

"Trie story that these men had to tell

appalled us.Corporal Walters hp- been compelled to stand to attention foi over forty hours before he collapsed. Fusilier Kinne had been kicked so

savagely during a beating-up in jail that he sustained a double-rupture'. (F,H, P. 260)

'After being given the overall I was taken outside the room and along a

corridor into another room and made to

stand against the wall as one is made to do for frisking only I was made to stretch my legs and arms as far apart as I could get them. My feet also had to be as far from the wall as possible, I was to remain in this position for at least two and at the

most four days with the hood on. I lost all track of time, but there is no doubt that I remained in this position for days. If I did not keep my head straight I was hit with a fist in the small of my back . . .

genitals . .

. arms. . . As the duration of my stance

against this wall grew longer, the

collapsing and falling became more

frequent, until eventually I bbegan falling every twenty or thirty minutes extract from signed statement made by

Michael Donnely on 20-9-71. Mr.

Donnely was arrested on the 9th of

August.

'Ding dealt personally with this case, as he had dealt with the colonel in securing 'a confession'. Denis was brought before

him, a proposition was made and turned

down. As Ding never personally supervised physical pressure on

prisoners, it was Sean who took Dennis

away to an out-house and had him strung

up to a beam, arranging it so that Denis's hands were secured so far up behind his back that he had to stand on tip-toe. Every hour, for four hours, Sean returned to ask Denis if he had changed him mind:

Denis had not. Sean left him until

morning, when he was cut down'. F-H P.

217 'When he awoke again he was taken

from the room he was in to another place where he was hung by by his fingers from the ceiling. He was in mid-air with his toes

just tipping the ground. He was kicked

again between the legs because he refused to say he was a member of the I.R.A. . . .

This interrogation lasted from Saturday night to Sunday night (Mrs Sinclair) visited her husband in Crumlin Road on

Tuesday, at mid-day and he told her about his ordeal.'

Extract from signed statement made by Mrs. Mary Sinclair and witnessed, on 20

10-71. Mr. Sinclair was arrested on the

16th of October. I have read eighteen individual

accounts of the interrogation proceedures. They relate to four different categories of men. Those who were released within 40 hours of being lifted or who were

subsequently released from internment.

Those who are presently interned, and

those who were interrogated since

October 16th, two months after the

original spate of interrogations. The proceedures alledged in these

statements, fall into roughly four

categories which were not mutually exclusive in the case of any individual.

1. Beatings and kickings, intermittant and sustained.

2. Special treatment: suspension from

fingers, electric shocks, sexual assualt,

primitive gymnastics, injections. 3. Disorientation: head in bag, stood for

days on end in room with throbbing noise,

(as in case of Doherty quoted above). 4. Use of firearms: guns inserted in mouth

and discharge of blanks, Russian roulette,

bullets discharged near detainee, and various other acts of intimidation with firearms.

The fact that there may be a case to answer has already been accepted by the British Government. Whais not yet apparent is the effect of the present army/R.U.C. policy on the community of

Northern Ireland.

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Tue, 24 Jun 2014 21:35:08 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FORTNIGHT 7

The great mistake seems to have

involved the R.U.C. at all. A time can

come when the British Army can leave the streets and the province. With it can

depart the animosity which has grown up between it and the Catholic population. Bit the R.U.C. will remain. After the 1969 troubles, but specifically following the attack on the Catholic getto in August of that year the R.U.C. were reformed. Part

of the restructure was the establishment of

the Police Authority. There is no doubt but -that the establishment of this institution carried the possibility of a new

phase in the relations between the police force and the public It represented a start towards the democratisation of the most

vital branch of the bureaucratic structure.

The Police Authority was concieved as a

type of board of to which the chief constable, the managing director of the

police services, reported. Its first real

problem was what action to take in the case of the twenty silent policemen who

were in the area when Sean Deverny was

assualted and subsequently died. The decision not to take any action could be

argued in retrospect to have been

imprudent. But it down not really matter in the light of subsequent events. This is

not to say that the authority has been discredited, it has simply not been credited in the first place. Power seems to be firmly in the hands of the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Authority has no function. Reports from a number of

sources indicate that the R.U.C. men

manning the interrogation compound at

Holywood barracks are from the same

ipersonnel . who formed the (S.P.G.)

Special Patrol Groups who featured in

August, 1969 troubles. Specific members have been identified and named by internees. This group of police officers

who were instrumental in bringing the Police Authority into being may also cause its demise. Resignations from the

Authority are not unexpected. Certainly, the nominee from the Universities can

expect to be called upon to justify the Authorities' position in the near future.

The case for 'tough' interrogation, or

whatever euphenism one wishes to use, is that it is justified by the 'pay off. (1) it saves 'British' lives by (a) cracking terrorists who are then interested.

(b) getting information on weapons, stores, supply routes etc.

(c) it gives leads to other suspected terrorists

(2) Following on from the above, the army can go over to the offensive. The terrorist is unsure of his stores, his supply routes

and his personal safety (3; Following on from this offensive the

military can progressively suppress the

terrorist or can so disorganise and disrupt

his activities that the scale of his offensive declines

(4) This is the crucial stage in the psychological war. The terrorist is now

represented as a loser" whose days are

numbered, in this situation it is

anticipated that the supply of informers coming forward with tip-offs will increase the support of the local population will start to waver. This is seen as a

cumulative development. Once on the defensive the terrorist must be harried

mercelessly.

(5) The reforms are now wheeled out.

Proportional representation, a larger

parliament etc. These are designed to win over the Catholic middle class and give the now frightened and hence tepid

working class sympathisers of the I.R.A.

the rationalisations they need to justify a closed door tothe man on the run.

This is all good Templar of Malaysia' stuff. The mescalculations are manifold.

By adopting 'Robust methods of interrogation' the forces of the crown have

fortfeited all moral authority. This may sound like girls high school retoric but its not. The loss of that moral authority has done more damage too the Unionist government and its Westminster backer's

than all the guns and gelignite that the I.R.A. coulo\have smuggled in in a year.

(a) It will go a long way to help topple Lynch (b) It will increase funds and delp from South of the border for the I.R.A. (c) It is likely to bring the Northern

Catholic clergy and Hierarchy into the area in a way that has not been seen in the

North of Ireland since the struggle for

emancipation prior to 1829.(d) It is just as

likely as not to increase recruitment and sympathy for the I.R.A. amongst the

Northern Catholics. If this happens the British Army is

defeated. This bears repition. The British Army has been manouvered into anti catholic stance. What we now have in the aftermath of internment and the

Holywood revelations is the makings of a jihad. The policy of backing the present

Unionist government all the way to the Holywood cantonment was based, not on

the merits of the Ulster situation, but because of the exigencies of the British internee political situation.

Despite this unqualified support the Orange tiger is still after Mr Faulkner.

Because of Holywood there can now be no

political settlement which does not bring the liquidation of the present regeime. We

have simply have got to start again and fashion the institutionf of Northern Ireland on a sound moral basis. The State

was founded to protect the position of the Irish Religious Minority. In seeking to

safeguard their position, the boundary was drawn so as to include a large catholic

minority. For this monority there were no

special safeguards.

Possibly the most disturbing feature of our society at this time is the growing brutalisation and corruption that is taking place. The victim of a bomb outrage looses his identity to the observer from the

other side. He ceases to have attributes of

humanity, a capacity to love, good humour

or whatever, his injury or loss find no

recognition. The terror of a family raided

by the army and the mistreatment of men in police "calls is not admitted to the mond

of one side, it is exorcised by feelings of malice or revenge. Most dangerous are the

thoughts of violence and attrocity which are entertained by thousands of

individuals in the silence and privacy of their own minds. They pay no heed to the fact that means corrupt ends and that

actions against an enemy can become

crimes against man.

When all this is over we are still going to have to live and work together. In the present situation both sides are heading for a 'maximum regret' conclusion.

Changes in the structure are seen as again one side and a correspmding loss to the other. But to start afresh and reshape our

institutions so as to frain away into constructive endeavour the bitterness and

frustration that have fed successive generations of gunmen and bombers and

call forth repeated internments and brutalities cannot be represented as a gain

bought at the expense of a corresponding loss to the other side. For on the basis of such a restructure the reconciliation of

Gael and Gall can take place. I believe that what has happened and what is

happening still at Holywood makes that restructuring inevitable.

Dail Dealings

James Irvine

A dark cloud of forboding hangs ocer the Dublin political scene after last week's two-day Dail debate on Northern Ireland.

The debate revealed three dissonant strains of argument with clarity. At one extreme, Mr. Neil Blaney, the former

Minister of Agriculture, snipped belligerently at the Government for its record. At the other, Fine Gael and

Labour speakers like Dr. Garret

Fitzgerald and Dr. Conor Cruise O'Brien, offered constructive criticism of Mr.

Lynch's policies (and as they saw it, his lack ot them) and condemned the current

violence of the I.R.A. in terms which carried conviction. In between, Mr. Lynch struggled unhappily with an indigestible

mixture of ritual condemnation of the continued British presence in the North and continued insistence that peaceful

means could end partition.

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Tue, 24 Jun 2014 21:35:08 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions