.
The SAD Campaign to Secure Millennium Pardons for British and Commonwealth Soldiers Executed during the First World War
Shot At Dawn
" It was a great shock when I opened the file listing details of executions in the Great War. What I found amazed and deeply troubled me. There were names, ages and details. I discovered that they were so young, so vulnerable and so alone. ...In only three cases did the prisoner have the benefit of a prisoner's friend. These young men, on trial for their lives, went before their superiors without legal representations or assistance. The knowledge of this is horrific, and has deep implications."
Leonard Sellers, author of
"For God's Sake Shoot Straight"
Military Executions First World War:
French: 600
Italy 500?
British: 346 [Includes Commonwealth troops]
German: 48
Canada: 25
Belgium 13
United States: 10 [For non-military offences - e.g. murder and rape]
New Zealand: 5
Australia: Nil
Russia: Nil
Stop Press
Immediate Press Release: 14 June 2006
Andrew Mackinlay MP was prevented from petitioning Parliament with his War Pardons Bill in May 2006. This seeks posthumous pardons for British and Commonwealth soldiers executed in the Great War for strictly military offences.
During Question Time on Wednesday 14 June 2006, Mackinlay doggedly returned to this vexed subject and again challenged the Government with the following question.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew Mackinlay MP:
‘Can I draw to the Prime Minister’s attention, that for three-quarters of a century it suited the British establishment to suppress the documents and the circumstances relating to the execution of over 300 British soldiers and officers, often many of them brave British soldiers who were executed in World War One.
Does he recognise there is overwhelming support in the country, and I believe in this House of Commons, that he and the Minister for Defence should review these executions and remedy this wrong by granting posthumous pardons, albeit very late in the day and he should do so on the occasion of this first Veterans day of the 90th anniversary of the Battle of the Somme on the 1st July.’
The Prime Minister:
;I’m very happy to look at what my honourable friend has said. I do understand the concern. I will look at it. I will get back to him with an answer upon it.
I know this is a situation with, even after all these years has passed, causes a great deal of distress and hurt to people.’
__________________________________________________________________
Within two weeks Tony Blair was handed a strongly worded petition from the readers of the Northern Echo which had recently highlighted the plight of a number of executed soldiers from the North-East. He was left in no doubt about the regions desire to see the exoneration of the 306 soldiers who were shot by their own comrades.
‘It’s a very good response, a very strong response and I understand the strength of feeling and the reason behind it’, said Mr Blair. ‘This needs to be studied in a lot of detail because there are a lot of ramifications. It will need to be done with close cooperation, with all of the services organisations.’
It is fair to observe two important considerations here. First, just how many more years does the Minister for Defence need having concluded in 1998 and 2006 that he can do nothing? Second, this matter has nothing to do with, nor does it need the close cooperation of any service organisation.
Resolution to the current dead-end rests strictly with the Government and their lawyers.
__________________________________________________________________
In the light of these development the Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign call upon all supporters and members of the public to write immediately to Tony Blair at Downing Street. Make it known that you wish to free the executed soldiers and their families from the shackles of shame.
The Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign continue to stress the urgent need for a free vote in the House of Commons
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
The British Government continue to refuse Pardons to the 306 soldiers who were executed by firing squad for alleged desertion and cowardice during the Great War. It now faces new unprecedented pressure to reconsider its position from several important sources.
First is the position of the Irish Government in Dublin. Alarmed at the disproportionately high rate of Irish executions by the British military it has conducted its own methodical inquiry at the highest level. They have drawn up a comprehensive report that highlights serious miscarriages of justice which has the support of the people of Southern and Northern Ireland. They fully agree with the idea of a retrospective pardon for all soldiers. That report is now available on this website. Also included is the Seanad debate on the Irish shot at dawn.
Briefly, these are the conclusions in the Irish Report.
• The courts martial were ‘inconsistent, capricious and unpredictable’.
• Of the twenty-six soldiers, only one had legal representation.
• No soldier was told of the possibility of clemency and they were ignorant of their rights.
• The courts failed to investigate defence claims.
• Evidence of medical affliction and other extenuating circumstances were ignored
• The military courts gave less weight to the merits of the case, more to the state
of battalion discipline.
• This resulted in grave injustice not deserving of the ultimate penalty.
• Military justice was not impartial because when compared with others, Irish
soldiers were executed disproportionately.
• This disparity is reinforced by the fact there is also clear evidence of class bias.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Please note that in September 1914, Sir John French gave instructions to the courts martial that they were to consider not only the weight of the evidence before them, but also the extra-judicial consideration of the state of discipline within the army.
Further, assess the effect of General Routine Order No. 585 sent to the BEF in January 1915? This removed the presumption of innocence in cases of desertion authorising the court to assume guilt. Thus, the burden of proof was reversed.
Now carefully consider the definition of a ‘show trial’ so familiar to Soviet history.
‘The term show trial describes a type of public trial in which the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant: the actual trial has as its only goal to present the accusation and the verdict to the public as an impressive example and as a warning. It tends to be retributive rather than correctional justice.’
_____________________________________________________________________________________
In common with the New Zealand Government; who have already pardoned and restored military medals to the relatives of their executed; the Irish Government seek pardons for the Irish soldiers in particular, and more generally, all soldiers who were shot. They dispute this will prove difficult, and draw attention to the fact King George V overturned, quashed and commuted offences by superior officers at the time.
They contend there is overwhelming support in Ireland and the UK for retrospective pardons that will finally lay to rest the memory of those shot at dawn.
The second source of pressure arises from the application to the High Court in London, late in 2005, which seeks a retrospective pardon in the case of Private Harry Farr. His daughter, Gertrude Harris, 92. has pursued this matter for 14 years. Mr.Justice Burnton has already remarked that the death penalty should not have been imposed in all circumstances. He has also commented on the possibility of a conditional pardon. Now it has been adjourned to give the Minister of Defence, yet more time to consider a response to the application. The court will reconvene late in March. The case has been adjourned again to a date early in April. Despite media announcements that the Minisiter of Defence is ‘reconsidering’ a pardon for Pvt Harry Farr, he continues to resist any such possibility.
Harry Farr was hospitalised suffering severely from shell shock. Yet, later when he said he couldn't go on, he was tried in a short 20 minute hearing and shot. At his trial Captain A Wilson described his conduct and character as 'very good'. His courts martial file makes chilling reading. In common with all those shot, Farr wasn’t told he could appeal to the Sovereign.
The British Government promise an early response to the Irish report, which they have had since October 2004, but drag their feet. It has been leaked to a leading opponent of our campaign who has publicly condemned it as 'an emotional polemic aimed at the British Government'
In the last debate in Westminster Hall in January 2006 Don Touhig MP, then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence, indicated a current inability to grant pardons because they are bogged down in a technical question of the delicate niceties of law. The Government feigns empathy and compassion to disguise their intractable intention of refusing pardons. They have every intention of fighting the Farr case at the High Court.
The application by Harry Farr’s daughter has deep and wide implications. If it is successful and a conditional pardon is granted, will it naturally follow that all the other 305 will also be absolved? Conversely, if it fails, will all the executed be irreversibly confirmed in their guilt. Is it this consideration which accounts for the fact the British Government are delaying any response to the Irish question? This seems likely because if they were to respond negatively before the decision of the High Court and that tribunal finds in favour of Farr then the British Government will be further embarrassed in its defiant refusal.
The Irish Government has now recognised the obvious. Military justice in the Great War was class and race biased resulting in terrible injustice. In order to ‘set an example’ the High Command had to compromise military legality. This is its most fatal and corrupt flaw that explains why military justice was arbitrary, inconsistent and irregular. Moreover, what about the legality of General Routine Order 585 in 1915 that reversed the burden of proof onto the accused? Our critics are sheepishly silent on this.
Most military historians; even those who oppose pardons; witness to the fact the ‘executed for example’ thesis was a grisly propaganda intended to intimidate and that it was without substance. It was a futile misconception. The official statistics clearly show there was no significant disaffection of front-line troops to worry the High Command. During the war period of four years, less than 5,700 cases of front-line desertions and only 631 cases of mutiny are recorded out of five million strong army. This is remarkable evidence of true grit and courage in the face of unparalleled carnage and destruction. In contrast, there were some 31,000 desertions at home for which no soldier was shot.
The real cowards in the executions story are that powerful elite who were obsessed with keeping secret any evidence; even destroying some; about what really went on. By doing so it has served to ensure that those shot at dawn remain convicted into perpetuity. It also meant that the decision-makers in the military legal processes would return to civilian life with their past involvement effectively concealed. The basis of this secrecy was to protect, not the vulnerable impoverished Private Tommy Atkins and his family, but the powerful that would return to prestigious positions in civil society.
On the other hand, the full weight of the law was applied retrospectively to those superior officers who were exonerated from guilt by the Royal prerogative of clemency from King George V. Clear evidence of substantive hypocrisy and institutional discrimination of the worst kind. Sadder still, is the fact such hypocrisy and discrimination continues unabated today.
The Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign has no wish whatsoever to re-write history, a charge with which our opponents smear our intentions. Our principle concern is more strictly confined to establishing justice for those who were truly denied it.
In November 1999, the Scottish Parliament made a formal parliamentary plea to Her Majesty's Government to recommend posthumous pardons. It fell on deaf ears, hard hearts and closed minds.
The Shot at Dawn Campaign deeply appreciate the efforts of the Scottish Parliament, the New Zealand Government and now more recently, the Irish Government.