tion" rather than indictment, but with particulars and specific violations based on constitutional Statutes and Acts-not on the catch all "suspect" provision of the Special Powers Act.

On departure this writer congratulated Mr. Faulkner's senior officials for their remarkable attitude and promised cooperation in responding to the Class Action Petition for Habeas Corpus by having the petition become moot by their new government policy.

The transcript did not arrive when promised for December 21-but, in place of same, the following documents were received on December 22, 1971, at 7:30 p.m., fully 24 hours later.

LOUIS KUTNER, Esq.

GOVERNMENT SECURITY UNIT,
STORMONT CASTLE,

Belfast BT4 3ST, December 22, 1971.

c/o Royal Avenue Hotel, 23 Royal Avenue, Belfast BT1 1FB.

DEAR MR. KUTNER: With reference to our talk yesterday I enclose copy of a draft note based on your dictated comments.

As you see I have shortened it somewhat and have also amended it so as to make it clear that it represents your own views as you presented them to me. If you care to issue any statement on these lines we would have no objections. We would simply ask that it should not be put out as a joint statement.

Yours sincerely,

M. K. HARRIS.

Mr. Louis Kutner, Chairman of the Commission for International Due Process of Law, visited Stormont Castle on December 21 and discussed with a senior official of the Government of Northern Ireland problems with respect to the Internment of certain persons in various locations under the Special Powers Act of 1922. Mr. Kutner called for an understanding with respect to the dignity and the worth of the individual as a human being and a recognition of the fact that international law played an important role in the implementation of human rights with respect to freedom from arbitrary detention and in guaranteeing the protection of the individual in his relations with the state. In the present situation he suggested the setting up of a commission or committee of inquiry composed of three persons, two of whom might be academic lawyers and the third a layman. The commission of inquiry should be empowered to issue information or particulars of offences alleged against each person, and the latter should be furnished with a copy of the accusation. He should also be able to obtain counsel, and should be given the opportunity to present any defense he chooses. The commission should be an impartial tribunal and its proceedings should be judicial. Legal rights and the due process of law mean fair play. The Commission's inquiry, therefore, should be based on a totality of all the evidence and the Government should be obliged to bring forward all facts helpful to the accused; by the same token it should produce all the evidence on which charges are based. Furthermore, the accused should be furnished with a transcript of the proceedings of his trail, and if found guilty, he should have the right of appeal to a review tribunal. Mr. Kutner was informed that the Northern Ireland Government was reviewing the present procedures governing internment and that his representations would be borne in mind.

In subsequent investigations and interrogations of credible members of Stormont and after conferring with several members of the Northern Ireland Parliament, this writer was advised that the views expressed and agreed to on December 21, 1971 was a true consensus of Mr. Faulkner's government, but that Mr. Heath's Westminster government had first to take the initiative. Friction was evident. The situation was tragically ludicrous and inhumane. Hence the edited and amended transcript.

It displays neuroticism in editing and a preoccupation with a superhard policy of callousness.

This writer continued to confer with antiinternment leaders in Dublin, Belfast, London, Majorca and Madrid.

Mention should be made of a salutory conference in London on December 23. 1971 with the Chancery Office in London in which a full disclosure of evidence was made available by this writer.

The published condemnation of Northern Ireland internments by the Roman Catholic Church in London, December 31, 1971, is an interesting and perhaps related coincidence of this writer's meeting. It is to be noted that on December 25,

1971 the Vatican Christmas Message of Pope Paul VI mildly comments on the turmoil in Northern Ireland. This was the first comment of the Roman Catholic Church on the Special Powers Act since it was passed in 1922.

In talking to the antiinternment leaders they were unanimous in their bewilderment and shock as to why the Roman Catholic Church had remained silent so long.

Another hard fact emerged in the on the spot investigation by this writer. It was the fact of competitive disunity, bitter resentment of each group and self appointed leaders engaging in micro-ego-trips in their antiinternment activities in assembling evidence and propagandizing their findings. It is doubtful whether their efforts can prove prudent or successful in the long run. Inflexibility and stagnation of affirmative effort mutually exclude and cancel out each other's efforts though premised on the best of intentions and real concern for the tortured and brutalized internees of Northern Ireland.

It may be of interest to report that within one hour after arriving in Belfast, this writer experienced a British Military Policeman's shoving a long gun in his face with the reminiscent hard cruelty and arrogance of a Nazi Storm Trooper; that platoons of British MP's in camouflage of battle fatigues stormed through the corridors of the City of Belfast High Court lobby, patrolled the streets in battle wagons with rifles cocked and pointed at pedestrians; that Belfast is a despairing, fear-ridden community concentration camp not so much concerned over the bombings, but by the indiscriminate and reckless assaults by neurotic, grimly comic, trigger happy, obvious Catholic-hating British MP's and Protestant Royal Ulster Constabularies.

This writer talked to mothers, wives, fathers, and sisters and brothers of the interned: saw survivors of those innocently gunned down; saw a child of 7 staring blankly, forever shocked by the wanton murder of her mother; talked to family and friends of a 20-year-old girl killed at a bus stop by British MP's who were shooting at shadows; and other internees who were released after being tortured and brutalized.

The hard core of anger of the Northern Irish can never be eliminated until the internees are freed, the British Military withdrawn, the Special Powers Act repealed, the British judiciary replaced by representative impartial magistrates, judges and prosecutors and constabulary, nondiscriminatory employment opportunities afforded to Catholics, fundamental restoration of due process of law to guarantee unconditionally the human right to individual freedom and human dignity and, finally, an independent Northern Ireland government, though there is a strong movement of unionists who desire unification with the 26 counties of the Republic of Ireland.

Mr. Harris requested an elaboration of the concept of habeas corpus.

Habeas corpus, though a writ of right is not a writ of course. Its scope has grown to achieve its purpose of protecting individuals against erosion of his right to be free from wrongful restraint in his rightful personal liberty.

Because of the historical imperfection of man and the fragile fabric of political institutions, judicial intervention in the fundamental issue of individual liberty is the rigid human .ight in the scheme of humanity.

World habeas corpus permits and favors the most judicial vigor in supporting the civil liberty of personal freedom.

Hostile societies and perverse political rulers can be made to yield to the emphatic rule of law that does not condone pretentious, vague, or rancid rhetoric of freedom for actual freedom in fact.

Unjust, arbitrary, unreasonable restraint of a human being anywhere in the world is a crime against all humanity and must be subject to the collective utility of the undaunted writ of world habeas corpus in accessible regional tribunals.

STATEMENT BY EMMET LARKIN, PROFESSOR OF BRITISH HISTORY,

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

COMMENTS ON Northern IRELAND

I hope the few things I have to say in this hurried way on what solution is possible in terms of the situation in Northern Ireland and the problem of the IRA make sense. I believe that there is ultimately only one solution to the problem in Northern Ireland, and that is a new partition and a complete repatriation of Protestants and Catholics. First as to the principle involved in such a solution. What has developed historically in Ireland since the 17th century are two ways of life. The distinction to be made between Protestant and Catholic in Northern Ireland is not simply a religious distinction. It is a cultural distinction. There are really two peoples with different values and indeed separate identities. Both feel that in the presence of the other their own way of life is being threatened. The question then just now for the northern Protestants is one of survival, for they feel that they are on the defensive and their way of life is under siege. As to the matter of feasibility as distinguished from principle in this repatriation solu tion, I believe the mass exodus of Catholics from Antrim, Down, East Derry and Northern Armagh would be both difficult and painful, as indeed would be the moving of the Protestants from Fermanagh, Tyrone, West Derry and Southern Armagh, into the more Protestant parts. The total number of people involved would amount to about 300,000-200,000 Catholics and 100,000 Protestants. The problem, of course, is that the Catholics could not be absorbed by the present Irish Republic, and they would have to be, or at least the largest part of them, repatriated overseas. This would be a very difficult problem to solve, not only economically but psychologically, for they would be asked in a sense to give up their way of life. The cost, furthermore, could not be met by the Republic and would have to be met out of the British exchequer. There would be, of course, a certain offset in terms of the repatriation of Catholic and Protestant property, but it would be nowhere near covering the total cost.

This problem of cost leads us to the second of my concerns, the role of the IRA in Northern Ireland. The psychological cost for Catholics would be certainly used by the IRA to prevent any such solution. The IRA's answer would simply be that it is not Irish Catholics who should be asked to surrender their way of life, but it should be those recalcitrant Protestants who should be moved out of Northern Ireland. The question, for me, I suppose, in the last analysis, is not how indeed can two ways of life be reconciled, but survive? There is no hope in leaving it to force majeure. It can only result in the annihilation of a very large number of people on either side, and end in the literal liquidation of one party or the other. In this context it is the IRA that must bend.

I am sorry about so pessimistic a view. I suppose it stems from the basic belief that the problem can only be solved by incredible violence or radical surgery. For me the concept of "Ireland a Nation" or "Ulster is Right" takes second place to the value of human lives involved.

(508)

STATEMENT BY HON. JOHN V. LINDSAY, MAYOR, CITY OF NEW YORK, N. Y.

In today's small world, we are bound together by a common destiny. Because we live at a time when a single human life seems worth less and less, we are obliged to speak out, as individuals and as a nations, against injustice and the forces that diminish the value of all human life.

Little more than a month ago, in a city thousands of miles from here, protestors marched, and crowds watched as soldiers deployed to maintain order. And then there was the sudden crack of gunfire and on the ground, the 13 dead of Derry.

We heard there were weapons, but no weapons were found. We were told these Irishmen were breaking the law and threatening order. But we have heard those lines before. We heard them almost two years ago, when college students were the victims of the men deployed to maintain order at Kent State and Jackson State.

As Americans, we should also recognize that what sent the citizens of Derry into the streets was not much different from what sent the people of Selma and Birmingham and Greensboro into the streets a decade ago. And so, we must speak out now, if we have learned anything from the battle for civil rights fought in our country—and from the tragedies at Kent State and Jackson State.

The pattern of discrimination and intimidation in Northern Ireland is clear enough, familiar enough. Catholics cannot get jobs. They live in segregated, inferior and crowded homes. They are under-represented in the professions and on public boards and commissions. They are denied their proper political voice. Above all, Catholics are the victims of the Special Powers Act. The Act allows the government to arrest without warrant; to imprison without charge, or trial, or the right to habeas corpus; and to search at will. The government can impose a curfew and ban meetings. It can compel witnesses to incriminate themselves, punish by flogging, and deny a prisoner access to his family or to legal counsel. The government can even prohibit an inquest into the death of a prisoner.

It is not for the United States to outline a political solution for Northern Ireland, but it is our obligation to protest injustice and to urge the British government, in the strongest possible terms, to insure that any political solution includes a guarantee of civil, political and economic rights for the Catholic minority and abolishes the Special Powers Act.

Yet, our government does not speak out in the name of humanity. We continue our own immoral combat in Vietnam. We discount the lives of countless thousands and remain silent about injustice in Northern Ireland.

There has been a pattern of silence under the Nixon Administration.

I believe that to stand mute while the government of Pakistan slaughtered the people of Bengal-as our government did-was a reprehensible act. And to refuse, even now, to recognize the reality of Bangladesh, after all of that struggle and bloodshed, is nothing less than diplomatic cowardice.

And I also believe that the refusal of the United States to speak out in support of those who struggle for basic social justice in Ulster is indefensible. Our government must speak out, even knowing that we can hardly expect the world to listen to our calls for justice and an end to violence until we have the courage to admit our own wrongs in Vietnam.

I believe the United States can once again stand for the best that is within us as a people. I think that we, as individuals, can again grasp the simple faith that the waste of a human life is the greatest evil we can commit. I think that we, as a nation, must reclaim our moral stature. To speak out in defense of the oppressed, against injustice and for simple humanity every where would clearly be a beginning.

(509)

STATEMENT OF REV. DANIEL LYONS, S.J.

WHAT ABOUT NORTHERN IRELAND?

The first thing to remember about Ireland is that it was a united country for nearly 2,000 years. When St. Patrick went there in the year 432 he had to deal with the high King at Tara. Ireland has been divided for only 51 years.

The second thing to remember is that Catholics and Protestants get along amicably and very equitably in the Republic of Ireland to the South, just as Protestants and Catholics get along very well together in England.

Prior to the Easter uprising in 1916, most of the leading Irish patriots for 150 years were Protestant. The first President of the Irish Free State was a Protestant. So is the Deputy Prime Minister today.

The question is not "Why can't the Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland get along?" The question is how long is England going to tolerate a oneparty system in the North that abuses religion in order to stay in power at any cost.

The Stormont parliament in Belfast is abusing its colonial power, not with the acquiescence of Westminster, but to Westminster's dismay. Most Englishmen simply do not know what is going on in Northern Ireland. So much so that when the BBC started to air a series of TV programs on Northern Ireland, British officials stopped them for being "pro-Catholic." They were not pro-Catholic. The newsmen had simply gotten to the facts.

Even in Northern Ireland, most of the one million Protestants are not aware of the injustices foisted on the half million Catholics by the government. These injustices are the most important thing to remember. Unless you keep these in mind, you cannot understand anything you hear or read. Here they are: the voting is so effectively gerrymandered that Catholics have never won an election, not even a local election in towns like Newry, where they are 90 percent of the popu lation; or in towns like Armagh, Londonderry and Dungannon, where they are 70 percent of the population. The victorious party is always the Unionist Party, which Catholics are not allowed to join.

The gerrymandering has caused severe discrimination in housing, since Catholic voters have to be kept in Catholic ghettos so they can be outvoted. The only exception to this has been in Derry (or Londonderry, as the British renamed it) where a housing commission was appointed from London. Since then, housing assignments in that area have been handled very fairly, though without upsetting Unionist political control.

The biggest abuse of all is in employment. The county councils (city governments) throughout the North hire between one and two percent Catholics. The national (i.e. provincial) government employs the same ratio.

Throughout the North, Catholics are the last hired and first fired. For example, ten percent of the men in Derry are unemployed. All of them are Catholics. Factories are consistently built only in Protestant areas.

The largest industry in Belfast is the Harlan and Wolfe shipyards. It has 11,000 employees. Only 400 of them are Catholic. The Sirocco Engineering Works in Belfast has 5,000 employees. Only 15 of them are Catholic. So it goes, and always has gone since Ireland was partitioned in 1921.

In that year, a new general post office was built in Belfast. When told it was a magnificent building, the postmaster replied: "The best thing about it is there is not one papist under the roof." But such policies were not primarily due to religious prejudice. They were due to a small group of men who used religion for political power.

In addition to the discrimination in employment, housing and voting, there are two other abuses: the police and the courts, both of which are the pawns of the ruling party.

To make matters worse, the Northern government is arresting Catholics by the hundreds, beating and torturing them, and interning them without trial. This has been going on since August 9, 1971.