Comment: The state's prosecution of anti-war activists is about power – not justice

I took the train(s) from Dublin to Ennis yesterday. Iarnród Éireann allows you to book a Dublin-Ennis ticket, €30 one way, but that ticket is for three trains. Heuston to Limerick Junction, Limerick Junction to Limerick, Limerick to Ennis. Tight journey. But that’s the free state: perfunctory Irish nomenclature for its state bodies, no interest in material republicanism in the provision of public transport for its people. 

I had Sharon Shannon’s Blackbird playing in my earphones, was reminded of it after reading a short interview with Shannon in the Irish Independent. She commended Kneecap. “They are heroes. Everyone should be doing the same – they can’t cancel us all,” she said. And sure she’s from Clare. I’ve always loved Blackbird, the sanguine part A, the switch to the minor sixth in the part B, plaintive but perseverant. Anyway. 

I was headed to Ennis for the court appearances of four anti-war activists. I’m not a court reporter. This is not a court report. This is not to denigrate court reports, which have their place, but the form requires certain conventions, omissions and inclusions that collectively confer a legitimacy on the proceedings they recount. 

A conventional report of yesterday’s sitting of Ennis District Court:

The trial of three activists who allegedly disrupted operations at Shannon Airport has been adjourned until July. Another activist, whose trial has also been adjourned, had an application to allow her travel to England for work denied. 

There’s a place for that, but to publish a traditional court report would require a tacit endorsement of the kind of justice advanced in places like Ennis District Court, the justice that prosecutes anti-war activists and considers US warplanes victims. 

As one of the accused, Claire Brennan, put it, “There has been no movement from the state on trying to inspect planes that are illegally carrying weapons. So we saw no other option but to stop it ourselves. We took direct action to stop the flow of weapons and troops from the US to the Middle East, including directly to Israel in the midst of an ongoing genocide in Palestine.”    

'The criminal damage that warplane itself does omitted'

Judge Alec Gabbett presided. Like all judges, he loves being a judge. He’s no disgrace to the profession but representative of it: supercilious, paternalistic, every bit the activist (unconsciously) as the activists before him. 

Nell Buckley was the first activist up. It’s alleged she broke into Shannon Airport to inspect a US warplane and threw red paint on it. A local freelance court reporter covered the proceedings. Different publications went for different headlines for his writeup. The Waterford News & Star’s was my favourite, whether its irony was intentional or not: “Woman (29) accused of criminal damage to US aircraft at Shannon,” with criminal damage something inflicted on the helpless US warplane by a 29-year-old woman, the criminal damage that warplane itself does omitted.  

Judge Gabbett wasn’t happy about the coverage of Buckley’s alleged actions across social, national and international media. He said it was of great concern to the court. We couldn’t be having that again. We couldn’t have an international incident. 

Buckley requested her seized passport back because she has a work trip to England coming up. Her employer, the Arts Council, had already booked her plane ticket. Gabbett wanted to hear from a garda Burke. So in waddled garda Burke. He gave his account of Buckley’s actions. 

Before making his decision judge Gabbett had questions about how much of a flight risk Buckley may be. One question in particular spoke to the class whose interests the court serves. Does she own a house? asked judge Gabbett. (Is she of the propertied class?) As he went back and forth with Buckley, garda Burke, still in the dock, was delighted to interject, saying he couldn’t rule out another incident. Job done, off again he waddled. 

These were “very serious allegations” against Buckley, said Gabbett. He had thought a lot, he said, all over the weekend too, and had now heard from garda Burke. He refused the application and also said he wouldn’t consider a request to allow Buckley to travel by ferry to Britain. 

Refusing this application to allow Buckley to travel through Dublin Airport stripped her actions of political intent, reduced them to something like alleged hooliganism. I spoke with the May Day Three by the steps of the court later on in the day and Claire Brennan recognised this. 

“They're trying to imply they don't see the political nature of our action. They repeatedly stated that having another person, who took direct action at Shannon, travel through Dublin Airport would be a danger to that airport and to other passengers, which is ridiculous. They all know that Dublin Airport has nothing to do with this and that the action at Shannon was everything to do with the US military and the ongoing genocide in Palestine. But we know it's an act. It's just a way to delegitimise our work and our actions and the intent behind them,” said Brennan.

'Well, I’d hope there won’t be a record'

The May Day Three were next up in court: Badhbh Ní Chathasaigh, Sinéad Ní Fhaoláin and Brennan. They’re also accused of breaking into Shannon Airport to inspect planes. Their action caused the airport to shut for an hour. A statement from their collective, Palestine Action Éire, at the time said the Irish state was “literally fuelling genocide” so they were forced into direct action. 

The DPP hadn’t delivered its directions in time so their cases were adjourned. It wouldn’t be prudent for the state to have these activists on trial during a genocide. (Nor does the state seem willing to bring quick resolution to the activists.) Though that adjournment was the matter of material importance, judge Gabbett’s engagement with the activists’ solicitor spoke to his institution’s priorities, how it treats and what it asks of those before it.

Ní Fhaoláin wanted to use her Irish name in the trial. This agitated the judge and he was irate speaking about the need for certain papers to be redrafted. He was comfortable suggesting the eventual outcome of the trial when he said to Ní Fhaoláin’s solicitor, “The record for the rest of her life will reflect this, so what’s it going to be?” The solicitor could only say, “Well, I’d hope there won’t be a record.”

Ní Fhaoláin’s request to work a summer job gave Gabbett another chance to flex. Her solicitor had engaged with a garda who was “satisfied” Ní Fhaoláin could work despite the ongoing proceedings. “Unfortunately I have to be satisfied,” said Gabbett, delivered with theatrics. On (and on) he unnecessarily went, his mind obviously made up and when a yes or no would’ve done, but, just as with those delays with the DPP, the accused were made to wait. Anyway it was a yes. “If they’re working, they’re not elsewhere, which is what I want,” he said.  

He didn’t get it. 

“I don't feel deterred by it at all. We've been getting a lot of support from so many different people. When this finally goes to trial, the judge will not be on our side, but the jury may be, because I have found that so many ordinary people support our actions. Because nobody wants the US military in Shannon. Our government is imposing that on us. There's been 20 years of this, completely against everyone's wishes, continuing to allow planes through Shannon, exempt even from inspections. I’m not deterred. I've seen all the support we've got,” said Badhbh Ní Chathasaigh outside the courthouse. 

The garda and judge, the activists, though describing and explaining the same events, seemed to speak different languages. Where the garda and judge spoke in terms of power, legality and, implicitly, self interest (the self interest of getting along, of submitting to the way things are), those being prosecuted spoke of justice, morality and collectivism. And though liberalism tells us that fundamental to our democracy is submission to the words and rulings of judges like Gabbett and the gardaí inside that courthouse, the activists outside spoke of democratic ideals in more profound terms. 

“We're building on a legacy of over 23 years of resistance to US use of Shannon Airport, which is a direct breach of our neutrality, which the majority of the country is for. We're building on that resistance. It is the most important time to do what we can to stop the bloodshed in Gaza. The US military also is involved. They fly through Shannon and through our airspace. We are directly involved in the killing of innocent people in Palestine, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria and beyond. We think it's really important to take direct action,” said Sinéad Ní Fhaoláin. 

'They won't be successful'

When the state addresses its complicity in Israel’s genocide it lies: the state says it has to facilitate the sale of Israeli war bonds through the Central Bank; the state says it will, one day, pass (a version) of the Occupied Territories Bill; the state says it can’t do anything about illegal weapons flights through Irish territory. And if you don’t accept these lies, if you take action, the state will prosecute you.

“This is clearly an attempt to repress and deter people from taking action in the future. We've seen already those attempts have not been successful. They won’t be successful. There are many, many of us and the action campaign will continue until the US military is out of Shannon and Palestine is free – from the river to the sea,” said Brennan. 

I was reading One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This by Omar El Akkad on those three trains back and forth to Ennis. 

“What power assumes, ultimately, is that all those who weren't directly affected by this, who only had to bear the minor inconvenience of hearing about these deaths from afar, will move on, will forget,” wrote El Akkad. 

“For millions of westerners this will always prove true. But for millions more it will not. In moments such as these, when the lies are so glaring and the bodies so many, millions will come to understand that there is no such thing as 'those people.' Instinctively this will be known to those who have seen it before, who have seen their land or labour stolen, their people killed, and know the voracity of violent taking.”