We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Updated at 1.11pm
PRESIDENT MICHAEL D Higgins has said a visit by his wife to imprisoned peace activist Margaretta D’Arcy was “private and personal” and that the issue of whether or not it was appropriate “doesn’t arise”.
The 79-year-old, who is undergoing treatment for cancer, was arrested at her home in Galway last week after she refused to sign a bond to keep away from unauthorised zones at Shannon Airport. She’s now serving a three month sentence in jail.
It emerged yesterday that Sabina Higgins had paid a visit to her in prison.
The event was played down as ‘private’ last night by an Áras spokesperson. And President Higgins reiterated that sentiment when questioned on the issue this morning by Today FM News Correspondent Fergal O’Brien
“Sabina was visiting a friend of long standing whose health is frail and who is a fellow artist,” the President said.
“Sabina is a person who can speak for herself and is a person of very good judgement, and we do a lot of other things as well.
“It’s not for me to comment — but it really is a private and personal visit to someone who is her friend who is fragile and who is a fellow artist.”
(Youtube: Fergal O’Brien)
Speaking earlier, Tánaiste and Labour leader Eamon Gilmore said that there was nothing inappropriate about the visit, and described the veteran campaigner as a “strong woman with strong convictions”.
Fianna Fáil’s Michael McGrath was also asked about the issue and said that it was the right of any citizen in the State “to make a private visit to a prisoner held in this State in whatever way they see fit”.
Asked whether she should be released, McGrath said it was a matter for the the judiciary and the Prison Service, and that no politician could interfere in such decisions.
Around 150 people turned out for a protest calling for the activist’s release at the Department of Justice in Dublin last Friday, with smaller demonstrations taking place in Galway and Limerick.
Speaking at the weekend, Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams called for her immediate release, saying that the writer and film-maker is “not a criminal and poses no danger to the public”.
D’Arcy had initially been given a suspended three-month jail term for trespassing at Shannon, but the sentence was activated after she declined to sign the court bond last week. She had been protesting the use of the airport by the US military.
Originally posted at 12.50pm.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
What’s to defend? Move on!
Loyal groveling slave to the U.S. Ireland, makes a statement of their allegiance to Phone Tapper Daddy Yankee by imprisoning sick elderly pensioner.
You might get another Obama visit out of this one Enda.
God bless America.
Wow! That’s quite a sentence. You got alliteration, assonance and onomatopoeia all in the one line. Wow!
Luvvies and other lefties just cant resist the temptation to use the victim ideology when it suits in tandem with their hatred of the capitalist US,who incidently employ over 100.000 people in 600 companies located here, its no surprise at all to anyone they support breaking the law at Shannon or anywhere else.
Sg
He was allowed visit on a day that prison is closed to visitors. Hmmm I wonder why she was allowed in ?
I would wager a substantial sum of money that the wife of the President used a State limousine and driver to convey her to the prison and the return journey to the Arus which attracts a very different hue to visit than if she used a taxi or public transport.
There can be no such thing as a private and personal visit to a prison by the spouse of our President as it will clearly hint at conjoint sympathy for someone who has broken the law and put the lives of others potentially at risk by entering the landing areas of an International airport in defiance of both the Law and Public safety.
This old woman was imprisoned at her own wish and Sabina Higgins should stay well away from the issue .
@Richie Rodgers …..A 79year old woman ” put the lives of others potentially at risk ” Ha ha that is really funny. Did she have her drones with her? her Blackwater mercenary murder gang? Obama and Bush and their corporate militaristic state are an insult to the founding fathers of that once great country.
This brave woman embodies all we once were as a people, A people that have principles, empathy who put those above filling our wallets with fiat money.
Well done Sabina your act of kindness is good in this rotten to the core country ruled and regulated by gangsters
I think mrs Higgins did the right thing here,regardless of her role as the presidents wife,she is also her own person,and the visit was to a friend,who I might add should not be in prison,in my opinion..she stands up for what she believes in.
Of course she should be in prison. She endangered lives by entering the restricted area of an airport. She had her chance to avoid prison by signing a peace bond and refused it. What do you think should have happened to her?
@ Montys – spot on.
#monty . The Military personnel flying thru cause a much bigger threat to human life. Than an oap in a restricted area of airport.
One lady is more dangerous than the us army killing machine? So Monty, u have no problem with a neutral country supporting and aiding an illegal war, invasion and DU poisoning of a country with the aim of removing a leader placed there by those now bombing him.
@Nagger — spot on.
Endangering lives? What is it you think the military who fly through do for a living?
Don’t see why it is not ok for mrs Higgins to visit her friend in prison. The old lady should not be in there in the first place she was protesting in a peaceful manner standing up for her believes. This country is rotten to the core.
She could have chosen to stand at the front door of the airport if she wanted to protest peacefully, not entered a restricted area.
She is entitled to protest peacefully about whatever she wishes. But, airport runways are, and must be strictly off limits! Too many lives at risk.
That seems be more an issue of lax Airport security Sean, If a frail old 79 year old can walk onto a runway of an international Airport.
The very fact that were are all commenting proves that her decision to go onto the runway was the correct one for her cause, do you think we would be discussing this if she just protested at the front door? The use of Shannon by the U.S military is illegal, what do you think should be done about it?
Yea Conor. Now if only there was a plane crash as a result of her protest! Then she could have made the news all over the world! Such a shame!!
That’s a complete exaggeration, how is that any different than someone running across a motorway? If what she did was soooo dangerous anyone caught crossing a motorway or jaywalking should be locked up then, I grew up near Shannon Airport and we were often on that runway unknown to anyone, The real fact is people don’t like hearing the ugly truth and she cannot be silenced. Irish people are supporting organized murder by support the U.S military.
What? If somebody was running around a motorway waving a placard then I would absolutely want to see them arrested. Anyone with a brain in their nut would know that’s dangerous and so is strolling around an airport runway.
Agree with Ginger,
I would want them arrested, as they pose a risk to themselves and others. I would also want them offered a chance to promise not to do it again, which she was and declined.
Should the State then just release them? I’d say no.
Should Mrs. Higgins visiting a friend in prison be a national concern? On a charge like this, definitely not.
I think that the visit is a smack on the face for the politically correct people. A hint of Irish “freedom”. A nice bit of controversy that puts a smile on the face!
Is their own private business and had nothing to do with anybody else.
I love Michael D !
A man of the people first citizen with honour is Michael D
If someone beat the living bejaysus out of me they wouldnt get a three month sentance, more like a slap on the wrist and told dont do that again, i dont condone what she did but would a curfew or something be more appropriate..shes 79 and sick
She had the chance to have a suspended sentence but refused.
Let’s be honest, if it was a twenty-something hippy jailed for 3 months for trespassing on an airport runway, having turned down the offer of a suspended sentence, we’d be saying that they deserved it. Trespassing on an airport runway is grossly irresponsible. You can say it was a peaceful protest all you want, but when you run the risk of causing a catastrophic accident, and put people’s lives at risk, that’s anything but peaceful. The argument is not whether the sentence justifies the crime (in my view, it does). The argument is that a 79 year old woman receiving cancer for treatment shouldn’t be locked in jail for 3 months. Some common sense should be used in situations like this, but a lot of the time, the law doesn’t allow for common sense.
This woman should have protested at the gates of Shannon airport. Whether or not that would have raised the level of awareness is irrelevant. If a protest in the city centre isn’t getting the publicity required, does that make it ok to run through the streets in the middle of traffic? I’m guessing not. So what’s the difference?
And there’s no reason why Sabina can’t visit a friend in jail, given the level of the crime.
Jesus Alan, a logical and appropriate comment on the journal! I’m in agreement and in shock mate; a breath of fresh air!
This is no big deal. Move on journal.
Did she pay her own way or use official transport to visit someone who broke the law?
It undermines the legal system when the first lady is seen to be supportive of a criminal.
Why is do much attention being given to this convicted criminal?
so much
Because she is right and because she was sent to jail for standing her ground. Not many would willingly go to jail for their principals.
Ross! foolish Muse! gotta will it or it wont f$u$cken happen ! You cant ? Got NO WILL POWER ? Always f$u%kn blue…. just stop breathing…. Well f$uc$k you this tuesday , Hows your Terry Prithard book going, Harry Potter..? …you having a street party ? Muse!looking forward to Royal wedding… you f$kn S.A.S! strip&shot. Go on beeetch! you,s contact me? confirmed? 00.00 take bat…
@ Conor – she was sentenced to prison for breaking the law, persistently.
@ Moron – you amuse me.
Yes Ross, she broke the law of our country and was convicted by our judiciary (a branch of our legislature), but that only matters if it’s a law which our Labour president (another part of a branch of our legislature) and his wife agree with. Double standards how are you? In any other country there would be outrage at this where people would actually understand its significance.
You had me until the “his wife agree[s] with”.
Firstly, that hasn’t been commented on by Mrs. Higgins, so that’s an assumption. Had Mrs. Higgins heard of this woman’s plight and decided to drop by to lend support based on nothing other than her belief on the law she broke, you may be able to infer that she supported her breaking of that law, but there is a pre existing (and from the sounds of it long term) friendship there.
We as a society allow people to visit those serving custodial sentences, add to that the woman is 79 years old and suffering from cancer. I fail to see how this is a problem.
I don’t disagree with you on the human aspects Sean, but there is a responsibility that comes with being the president and his or her spouse. That includes not acting in a manner which is, or could be perceived to be, in conflict with the constitutional role of the office. Our president already has history of being political despite the apolitical nature of the office, and this only serves to heighten that perception, as well as (and much more importantly) bring into doubt the integrity of our legislature. If Mr Higgins (and by extension, his wife) was not prepared to act in accordance with the expectation of the role of the office, then perhaps he should not have stood.
They should both be mindful of the apolitical office which is bestowed upon them by the people of this country.
Why wouldn’t he. He was a ring leader in the protests in Shannon many years ago the pri#k
As she visited in a private capacity, we can therefore assume that the state incurred zero cost. No state car, no state driver etc???
Just one question here for everyone. Would it be a private matter if the presidents wife visited a pedophile or rapist in prison? Would we have such tolerance and acceptance? I think not! So whats at issue here is the reason for the persons incarceration. If it is in the “acceptable” category, then Sabinas visit is “private and personal”. However, if the crime was heinous, then there would be outrage! So, it is not related to “private and personal”, it’s related to the scale of the conviction! Lets dispense with the smokescreen here!
Fair play to her. Wouldn’t be a big fan of her breaking the law but at least she’s fighting on behalf of her conscience, something we all should applaud.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/20/freedom-use-lose-antisocial-behaviour-bill
These people are all ‘artistes’ and luvvies, they have their own atmosphere and dimension.
I’d say if someone coughed in public nowadays it would cause offence
was she checked going in, in case she was trying to smuggle in a shank?
Two articles on a non story.
How is this newsworthy?
Because right-thinking people should see it as an inappropriate position for our apolitical president and his wife to take. Unfortunately our president doesn’t get the apolitical bit. Because he’s Labour (and hence a popular lefty) is no reason to accept this. If it were a FG or FF president and spouse taking this position, there would be outrage amongst readers here.
@Fredrick ….”Because right-thinking people should see it as an inappropriate position for our apolitical president and his wife to take.”
right-thinking people should be concerned about American owned private security forces murdering men women and children in the middle east and allowing the illegal use of our airports in contravention of our so called neutral status. Right thinking……I take it you meant “far right wing” thinking.
This country is gone phooking stone mad locking up this women shame on yas all involved
The fact that someone could actually get onto the runway at Shannon says alot considering which aircraft are using Shannon, Count themselves lucky she was an activist and not a terrorist. ..
I support her work but she was offered temporary release a few days ago but refused to sign paperwork
The journal is really milking this story. It’s good click bait that gets the proles riled up, I guess.
Did she get a bus down? Drive herself praps?? No got her self chauffeured down in state car..then its not a” private” visit.
this is a non story in so many ways.
1 Mrs Higgins is not a public figure…shes only married to one
2 even public figures can visit convicted murders
When the explanations start to pour out you sense that there must be niggling concerns. The moral is don’t enquire if he is an atheist; don’t ask which of his wife’s friends are in the clink and don’t expect Jesus to feature in his Christmas Message – or you will be hearing from the Chief of Staff of the military if smells ‘embarrassment’.
He should resign !. Lack of judgement for the first lady to be going to see a convicted criminal in jail.
Good on her have to laugh the FG/Tories giving out about this and on the other hand praising their dear leader Enda for his cowardice in not bring up human rights with the oil barrens in the Middle East unreal
Can someone tell me why this woman should not be in jail , she and her ilk think they can invade airport runways and do as they please,.
It appears they think the law should not apply to her as she is a poet and peace activist and she thinks that she is above the law of the land.
They also wasn’t us to think there was no political influence used to arrange a Sunday visit to limerick prison,why not visit during normal visiting times?
One word, “YAWN”.
Ireland is not neutral , we facilitated the US in refuelling and transporting prisoners .. We can’t say we are neutral , we are involved now and we could be open to terrorist attacks .
Is the question an appropriate question? That’s what I want to know.
How many if our Gov ministers should be jailed fir violating irish law – aviation laws and the rest
.
Never mind Sabina Higgins and her reasons for visiting an incarcerated friend. Why the hell has the Irish state chosen to lock up an elderly lady to start with? Surely prison is for those who are a danger to society? What does it say about our justice system that we choose to lock away such a person for engaging in her right to protest?
#freemargeretta
have your say