Keith,

"She is a historian, a doctorate in History from Trinity College Dublin and author of "numerous scholarly articles" beside her 16 books on Irish history.
We have seen she is published in "History Ireland."
Cougan never has been and never will."

An endorsement coming from such a fervent anti-republican as yourself would raise many an academic eyebrow at History Ireland magazine, I'm sure
This from the Irish Soldiers Pardons Campaign (WW2) website will perhaps give you an idea of the leanings of HI's founder and editor, Tommy Graham's .
http://www.forthesakeofexample.com/


7. Tommy Graham Editor of History Ireland stated in his contribution on the BBC NI Newsline programme, 2 February 2012; "My suggestion is that they be given an amnesty. A Pardon implies that the government did something wrong". An Amnesty is a legislative or executive act by which a state restores those who may have been guilty of an offence to the position of being innocent, it includes more than Pardon, in as much as it obliterates all legal remembrance of the offence. In contrast, a Pardon is the forgiveness of a crime and can change or remove the effects of the penalty, however the scope of both Amnesty or Pardon is also dependent on the language used. Actively supported by the Irish Government through diplomatic channels the British government was able to use considered parliamentary language to alleviate the roughness of their Pardons amendment passed by the House of Commons in November 2006 for the 306 WW1 Shot at Dawn.. and the history of world war one remains intact. Even though the Irish Government Report had previously adduced evidence that WW1 court-martials were legally flawed the British pardon did not decide on the guilt or innocence of those Irish born British soldiers executed for military offences during world war one but did remove insofar as practicable the stigma of dishonour that was attached to the executions for the sake of the families and did so in a unique way which avoided the issue of fault by not apportioning blame to either side. Crucially the British Pardon did not displace the history of the Shot at Dawn but left that history intact for the historians to deliberate on ad infinitum. In the March April 2012 edition of History Ireland Mr Graham also suggests inter-alia that the court-martialling of deserters would have been more severe thereby implying that the political process route viaEmergency Powers (362) Order of 1945 was mild in comparison, he should ask the families as to whether the so called punishment was mild or not and taking into account that Mr Graham had not seen the contents of theBlacklist until 28 February 2012, perhaps he should do the research first before making further ill-informed comment. Dail Eireann/the Irish Parliament is not a military court of law and no amount of side stepping or obfuscation of the English language on the part of Mr Graham et al can change that fact. Pursuant to the separation of powers in the Irish constitution Dail Eireann as a political chamber cannot legally subvert the judicial function of the courts and if Mr Graham has evidence to the contrary he should produce that evidence forthwith. The political process inaugurated by the de Valera government to adjudicate on the desertion issue post war and which Mr Graham argued as being masterly on a television broadcast in 2011 was legally flawed from the outset and the policy of Irish Neutrality which Mr Graham has also raised has nothing whatsoever to do with the treatment of the desertion issue per se. Indeed raising the policy of Irish neutrality is a red herring and is intended to distract the debate away from the questionable political process that was used by the de Valera Government some three months after the end of the second world war to adjudicate on persons who were subject to Irish military law and accused of desertion during the Emergency. The introduction of Emergency Powers (362) Order 1945 was a cynical political exercise which ousted the jurisdiction of a military court of law and the administration of justice for the sake of political expediency and shows a total disregard by the de Valera Government for the constitutional rights of its own Irish citizens post war. Although in a previous interview with the BBC Mr Graham recommended an amnesty as a solution, he now recommends that the Attorney General should leave matters as they are and then opines sarcastically in his editorial "I understand that she has other, pressing matters on her desk in any case". Interestingly Mr Graham was an avid supporter of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl and fully supported the Irish Government in its efforts to achieve the one size fits all blanket pardon granted by the British Government in November 2006 for the WW1 Irish Shot of Dawn on the basis of an injustice but is apparently not in favour of a one size fits all blanket pardon for Irish defence force personnel subjected to the rigours of the one size fits all Emergency Powers (362) Order of 1945. Mr Graham's obvious contempt for the objectives of the Irish Soldiers Pardons Campaign (WW2) and our families really comes into its own when he permits the unauthorised publication of a photograph and a family heirloom of a group of soldiers now deceasedin his magazine. The use of this photograph in the History Ireland article "The Disowned Army" by Donal Fallon is a breach of copyright irrespective as to whether the family member is credited or not and despite indicating to the editor that the families be left out of the issue it was included against our expressed wishes. One wonders as to what ethos and editorial guidelines History Ireland subscribes to? It seems Mr Graham and Oscar Traynor have something in common and are re-echoing Traynor's Words of Condemnation that these Irish defence force (alleged) deserters and their families are not worthy of consideration? As our campaign effort is focused primarily on seeking natural justice for surviving veterans and their families, and as Mr Graham and History Ireland are vehemently opposed to any resolution to the pardons issue on the spurious grounds that political expediency takes precedence over the democratic principles of natural justice and the right to defend oneself in the military courts, and as Mr Graham's view represents a significant departure from the rights of citizens as determined by the Constitution of Ireland, the question now arises as to which constitution does Mr Graham owe allegiance to?In common law legal systems such as in the Republic of Ireland, is not the trial/conviction/punishment of a person/alleged deserter in absentia, that is, in a trial/military court in which he/she is not present to answer the charges, held to be a violation of natural justice and an infringement of a persons right to a fair hearing?Significantly at the end of October 2011 the proposed 30th Amendment of the Irish Constitution dealing with the powers of the Oireachtas/Irish Parliament, was heavily criticised on the basis that politicians would be given powers to determine for themselves what is fair and what is not and that citizens would be deprived of their right to legal representation if passed by referendum. Senior legal figures including Professor Gerry Whyte of Trinity College also expressed disquiet that the amendment might give the Oireachtas power to conduct inquiries in which people could be deprived of their right to fair procedure. The Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL)urged Voters to reject the proposals which they claimed could turn Oireachtas Committees into "kangaroo courts". A group of eight former Irish attorneys-general came out against the referendum, stating that these proposals would seriously weaken the rights of individuals to their good name and provide insufficient protection for the independence of the judiciary. Various other eminent legal practitioners raised concerns about this provision including former Minister for Justice Mr Michael McDowell SC who urged the electorate to Vote No to inquiry powers while we can and explained his ratio publicly in the Irish Sunday Independent 23 October 2011arguing, that the proposed constitutional amendment was utterly disproportionate, unjustifiable and commented:"If no politician in the present Government and only a handful in the Dail have had the courage to speak out against it (30th Amendment of the Irish Constitution) when it was being cooked up in secret, how can we trust a Government in future not to abuse these powers"? Mr Graham should note that the referendum on Houses of the Oireachtas Inquiries was rejected by the Irish people on Thursday 27 October 2011. Irrespective as to whether defence force personnel enlisted in UK forces or went elsewhere, was not Emergency Powers (362) Order of 1945so constructed that its effect was to frustrate the right to a fair hearing for all defence force personnel named as deserters in the de Valera Government Blacklist post war? Was not Emergency Powers (No. 362) Order of 1945 a legislative exercise of a judicial power which determined the guilt and inflicted punishment on an identifiable class e.g. defence force personnel without the provision and protection of a judicial trial, e.g. a military court-martial? Surely all citizens have equal rights pursuant to the Irish constitution? In this regard it is instructive to note the submission on the 31 August 1976 by An Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Liam Cosgrave TD to Dail Eireann as he moved the resolution to introduce Emergency Powers Bill 1976 and the Criminal Law Bill 1976. Mr Cosgrave stated inter-alia "there have been comments and headlines which suggested that the Oireachtas was to be asked to suspend the Constitution. Deputies will appreciate, I am sure, that this is not so. If it were true, the Constitution would have been suspended since 1939. The reality is that it has not been so suspended by adoption of the present resolution. The protection from Constitutional challenge which would be afforded would extend solely to laws expressed to be for the purpose of securing public safety and the preservation of the state". The subsequent Irish Supreme Court decision In Re Art 26 and the Emergency Powers Bill 1976 - 1977 Irish Reports 159 is the legal authority which establishes that an Emergency Powers Bill leaves general constitutional rights intact. Consequently as the Constitution of Ireland Bunreacht na hÉireann was not suspended during the Emergency had not accused defence force personnel the inalienable right to adduce and challenge evidence in their defence according to military law as persons subject to military law and within a military court of law following the conclusion of world war two? For Mr Graham et al to argue, suggest or by implication promulgate the view that political expediency takes precedence over the democratic principles of natural justice and fair procedures in a democracy which has a written constitution is legally and morally untenable. The proposition that the military offence of desertion is unforgivable, unpardonable and that a pardon would be tantamount to condoning desertion within the Irish Defence Forces being advocated by those opposed to the pardons campaign is also CODOLOGY. The same contention was disseminated some years ago by those who were also opposed to the granting of pardons to the (Irish) Shot at Dawn on the spurious grounds that any compassionate act by the British Government to Pardon WW1 Servicemen would be prejudicial to the good order and military discipline of UK forces. For the record The Morale and Military Discipline of the British Armed Forces remains steadfast. Other governments have pardoned service personnel dismissed for desertion without undermining their status quo. The ingenuity of the New Zealand Government parliamentary draftsman in constructing a simple and straightforward text which does not rewrite the history of the New Zealand WW1 executed is exemplified unambiguously in theirPardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act 2000 and for the record The Morale and Military Discipline of the New Zealand Defence Force remains steadfast. Irrespective, we are confident in the Bona Fides of the Minister for Defence Mr Allan Shatter T.D. who has the necessary political and legal acumen to deal judiciously and compassionately with the Pardons issue in the interest's of the surviving veterans and their families and to do so without changing the history of the Emergency or tearing up the Manual of Irish Military Law... and for the record The Morale and Military Discipline of the Irish Defence Forces is steadfast...and will always remain steadfast;