DR GARRET FitzGerald has defended in principle the use of internment without trial and broadcasting bans against what he called “extremists”.
Addressing the second annual McCluskey Civil Rights Summer School in Carlingford, Co Louth, Dr FitzGerald said he was “in favour of internment in certain circumstances”.
He told his audience, comprising politicians, human rights campaigners and others from all over Ireland, of the various uses of internment by Irish governments since the 1920s, claiming it had been “effective” in “limiting the scale of terrorist activities”.
“It is a humane way in extreme circumstances of avoiding civil war,” he said, adding that it “should not be ruled out in principle”.
However, he said the “abuse of internment” in Northern Ireland in 1971 when it was clumsily deployed against one section of the community “had the practical effect of making its introduction thereafter in Northern Ireland and also in the Irish State, impossible in practical terms”.
He said “the general evolution of public attitudes to human rights has, in practice, made the use of internment unacceptable – save perhaps in the most extreme circumstances”.
Turning to the limitations on freedom of speech, notably Section 31 of the Broadcasting Act between 1971 and 1993, Dr FitzGerald argued against what he said was “a liberal fallacy” that the broadcasting ban against members of proscribed organisations prevented their “exposure”.
Citing Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams and former DUP leader the Rev Ian Paisley, Dr FitzGerald said they tended to “get the better of interviewers and to gain support and prestige rather than being exposed by access to these media”.
Extremists, he said, had no hesitation about lying and interviewers, given their normal experience with democratic politicians, have simply not proved capable of challenging this.
He further argued that the ban on RTÉ reduced the risk of loyalist violence against the Republic.
“To have permitted IRA spokesmen to have access to [RTÉ] would, in the eyes of many unionists and loyalists in Northern Ireland, have identified the Irish state itself with the IRA,” he claimed.
“That would have greatly increased risks of loyalist violence against the nationalist community in the North which it was the Irish government’s primary duty to seek to limit.”
Dr FitzGerald also referred to the need for consensus on human rights measures in Northern Ireland and on the North-South dimension to the protection of such rights – the twin themes of the summer school.
Addressing opponents of proposed human rights measures, he asked rhetorically: “What is it about human rights that you don’t want?” and he added: “There are real issues in Northern Ireland and they’re not being addressed.”
In a detailed analysis of Irish foreign policy, Dr FitzGerald claimed Ireland has “the best system of foreign rights”.
“We are a small country with a quite limited range of interests to defend [and] we have more space than most to pursue out ideals in the international forum.”
Foreign policy had to encapsulate and serve both ideals and also interests.
“Ireland has a remarkable diplomatic record in relation to human rights but we also have interests to defend. Sometimes these two elements may clash and reconciling them can pose problems.”
He defended the need to maintain good relations with the US because of the extent of US investment in Ireland and the need for American support in dealing with the British government over Northern Ireland.