They Closed the Door at 1922. I Asked Parliament to Examine the Lock.

Today, I took the next step in challenging Ireland’s new 2026 pre-1922 pardon policy.

For anyone new to this campaign, the issue is pretty simple.

The Government’s new policy draws a line at 1922. Going forward, convictions from before the foundation of the State will no longer be considered for Presidential pardon.

My problem with that is not that I believe every historical conviction should be pardoned. I don’t.

I believe credible surviving evidence should be allowed to be independently examined.

That is what I originally requested in the 1882 Lough Mask case involving Michael Flynn and Thomas Higgins. I did not ask Ireland to simply declare them innocent. I asked for the surviving evidence to be examined.

The Department refused, relying on the new pre-1922 policy.

I challenged that decision and the policy twice in writing.

And there is an obvious question here.

Ireland has already been willing to go back and examine pre-1922 convictions. Myles Joyce was posthumously pardoned in 2018, John Twiss in 2021, and Sylvester Poff and James Barrett in 2024, following historical examination of those cases.

So why should surviving evidence suddenly become unworthy of examination because the conviction happened before 1922?

There is another reason I believe Lough Mask deserves examination.

These concerns did not suddenly appear 143 years later because I started asking questions.

In July 1882, T. M. Healy raised Michael Flynn by name in Parliament while Flynn was imprisoned in Kilmainham, questioning the refusal of relief to his family.

Then, after the Lough Mask trials and executions, Charles Stewart Parnell himself brought the Lough Mask trials before Parliament on 26 February 1883 as part of his challenge to the administration of the Crimes Act and jury selection.

Parnell told Parliament that Michael Flynn was tried by 10 Protestants and two Catholics, after the Crown ordered 53 prospective jurors to stand aside, 41 of whom were Catholics.

The surviving record today raises questions involving the evidence, informers, jury selection, the use of police interpreters for Irish-speaking defendants and material relevant to the defence.

The records still exist.

That is why today I wrote to the Joint Committee on Justice, Home Affairs and Migration at the Houses of the Oireachtas, Ireland’s national parliament.

This is not another letter back to the same Department that refused my request. The Committee is made up of TDs and Senators from across political parties and is responsible for parliamentary scrutiny of justice policy and the work of the Department of Justice.

I have now asked the Committee to examine the legal basis, operation and consequences of the Government’s 2026 pre-1922 policy and to consider putting a very simple question to the Minister for Justice:

What statutory or constitutional authority requires a blanket 1922 cutoff, and was the surviving evidence in the Lough Mask case actually examined on its merits before my request was refused?

I’m sharing part of my redacted email to the Committee with this update.

If you want to read the full redacted email, I’ll be posting it on The Pre-1922 Justice Project Facebook page, along with the historical records, evidence, research and updates as this challenge moves forward:

https://www.facebook.com/share/1Eac3NZ3Fx/?mibextid=wwXIfr

And apparently this is what happens when you give a stubborn Irish woman who doesn’t back down easily Wi-Fi and a send button. 

Ireland’s Justice Committee has mail.

I can be one determined bugger. 

#DontSilenceTheEvidence #Pre1922JusticeProject