Abstract
Within the penological history of Ireland, few prisons differ from the conventional form of cellular confinement. Unconventional forms of containment, such as internment, were used sporadically and temporarily throughout the twentieth century, usually during periods of civic unrest or violence. The compound system of containment, utilized by the British government at both the Maze/Long Kesh and Magilligan sites during the conflict, represents the most consistent and permanent use of unconventional imprisonment maintained on the island of Ireland. Drawn from field research conducted in Northern Ireland from 2014 to 2016, this chapter will present narratives of former Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) and Red Hand Commando (RHC) compound prisoners to discuss how further opportunities for group and individual autonomy were facilitated by paramilitary leadership. The regime developed by the leadership of the UVF/RHC illustrates the dialectic relationship between the physical structure of the compound system and its unorthodox operations. These narratives will demonstrate how the group and individual identities were fostered and altered through the combination of the prison structure and paramilitary regime. The distinct nature of the compound environment and paramilitary regime created narratives of imprisonment unique to the island of Ireland. Further study of these structures and regimes reveals a more complex and nuanced understanding of not only the history of imprisonment during the conflict but also the impact of unorthodox methods of containment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Maze, Long Kesh, and Magilligan are provincial places names. Long Kesh was the name of the RAF base and internment centre. In 1972, the British government changed the site’s name to HMP (Her Majesty’s Prison) Maze. At the time, the Long Kesh centre had garnered unwanted political associations with a prisoner of war camp, and it was therefore deemed necessary to change the name to ‘remove’ the politicized association. Although the formal name remained HMP Maze until the prison’s closure in 2000, most former prisoners, from both the compound and H-block systems refer to the prison as Long Kesh. Taking these mixed nomenclatures into consideration, this chapter will use the combined terms.
- 2.
The Maze/Long Kesh compounds opened as an internment centre in September 1971, following the introduction of internment in August. Sentenced prisoners were transferred from the conventionally formatted Crumlin Road prison to the Maze/Long Kesh compounds following the concession of special category status in June 1972. The compound prison system remained open until 1988, when the remaining prisoners were transferred to a designated H-block in the Maze cellular prison. The Magilligan compounds opened in 1973 to accommodate the increased prisoner population at the height of the conflict. Magilligan prison closed in 1975 and the remaining prisoners were transferred to the Maze/Long Kesh compounds. Within Northern Ireland prison scholarship, no scholars have yet to analyse or document the history, operation, or prisoner narratives of the Magillian compounds, representing a significant gap in academic scholarship on conflict-era prisons.
- 3.
The UVF reformed in 1965, responding to the perceived threat of republicanism and the liberal policies of Prime Minister Terrence O’Neill (Reed 2015, 39; Novosel 2013, 16). Some debate exists on the date of formation for the RHC, but more recent accounts trace their development to 1970 (Smith 2014). In 1972, the leadership of the UVF and the RHC signed a joint agreement stating the combination of their operations. Within this statement, a special provision was made for UVF and RHC prisoners, stating all prisoners in those groups would fall under UVF leadership (UVF/RHC Agreement 1972). There were senior RHC members in leadership positions in the compounds, but all UVF/RHC prisoners fell under Spence’s overall command.
- 4.
Special category status consisted of six concessions: one half-hour visit per week, unlimited incoming and outgoing mail, one food parcel per week, and most significantly for the political identifications of the prisoners, the right to wear personal clothing at all times, the right to free association with other prisoners, and no requirement to perform work for the prison authorities (Crawford 1982).
- 5.
William Whitelaw, the British Prime Minister that conceded special category status did admit in later years that he had made a mistake in instituting the policy (McKittrick and McVea, 137).
- 6.
Without question, the creation of this ‘double anomaly’ motivated republican and loyalist prisoners to commence prison protests immediately following the introduction of criminalization. Newly classified prisoners began refusing prison issue clothing by the autumn of 1976 and began a period of protest, violence, and unrest on the Maze/Long Kesh site that continued for a further five years (McKittrick and McVea 2000, 138). Though most histories of the Maze/Long Kesh prison cease to reference special category prisoners or the compound system following March 1976, this chapter argues the relative closeness of the compounds to the H-blocks would have further motivated protesting prisoners. Members of the same organizations, who had committed similar violent acts before March 1976 retained political status and rights and were housed several 100 yards away throughout the duration of the protest period. In arguing for the virulence and significance of the protest period, this geographical, political, and emotional consideration is often overlooked, if referenced at all.
- 7.
Former compound prisoners confirmed that they referred to prisoners convicted of non-political offenses as ‘ordinary, decent criminals,’ or ‘ODCs.’ This linguistic distinction is important for understanding the significance of political prisoner identification during the conflict. The origin of the term is unknown.
- 8.
Due to his fascination with British and Irish military history and the connection between the first UVF and the First World War, all UVF/RHC compound huts were named after battles from the First World War (Garland). This renaming added to the militarized perception of the physical space of imprisonment.
- 9.
Several research participants were given indeterminate sentences, and referred to themselves as SOSPs because they were serving at the Secretary of State’s pleasure. For these prisoners who did not know when they would be released, time management and occupation were incredibly important to their psychological maintenance.
- 10.
Several research participants were given indeterminate sentences, and referred to themselves as SOSPs because they were serving at the Secretary of State’s pleasure. For these prisoners who did not know when they would be released, time management and occupation were incredibly important to their psychological maintenance.
- 11.
Spence was released from the compounds in 1985 but resigned his position as compound commander by the late 1970s. Most former prisoners recalled how the strictness of the routine did not last throughout their sentence, particularly after several changes in leadership and Spence’s release.
- 12.
Both republican and loyalist prisoners referred to the compounds as ‘cages’ as a part of their politicized language regarding their treatment as ‘prisoners of war’ and their emotional relationship to their spaces of confinement.
Bibliography
Casella, E.C. 2007. The Archaeology of Institutional Confinement. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
Challis, J. 1999. The Northern Ireland Prison Service, 1920–1990: A History. Belfast: Northern Ireland Prison Service.
Coogan, T.P. 2002. On the Blanket: The Inside Story of the IRA Prisoners’ “Dirty” Protest. New York: Palgrave.
Crawford, C. 1979. Long Kesh: An Alternative Perspective. Msc Thesis. Cranfield Institute of Technology.
———. 1982. The Compound System: An Alternative Penal Strategy. The Howard Journal of Penology and Crime Prevention 21 (1): 155–158.
De Cunzo, L.A. 2006. Exploring the Institution: Reform, Confinement, Social Change. In Historical Archaeology, ed. M. Hall and S.W. Silliman, 167–189. Oxford: Blackwell.
Foucault, M. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Trans. A. Sheridan. London: Penguin Books.
Gardiner, Lord. 1975. Report of a Committee to Consider, in the Context of Civil Liberties and Human Rights, Measures to Deal with Terrorism in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
Garland, R. 2001. Gusty Spence. Belfast: Blackstaff Press.
Goffman, E. 2006. Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates. In Prison Readings: A Critical Introduction to Prisons and Imprisonment, ed. Y. Jewkes and H. Johnston, 174–180. Portland: Willan Publishing.
Green, M. 1998. The Prison Experience – A Loyalist Perspective, Research Document No. 1. Belfast: EPIC.
Hillyard, P. 1978. Police and Penal Services. In Violence and the Social Services in Northern Ireland, ed. J. Darby and A. Williamson, 117–139. London: Heinemann Educational Books, Ltd.
McEvoy, K. 2001. Paramilitary Imprisonment in Northern Ireland: Resistance, Management and Release. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McGuffin, J. 1973. Internment. Tralee, County Kerry: Anvil Books, Ltd.
McKeown, L. 2001. Out of Time: Irish Republican Prisoners, Long Kesh, 1972–2000. Belfast: Beyond the Pale.
McKittrick, D., and D. McVea. 2000. Making Sense of the Troubles. Belfast: Blackstaff Press.
Novosel, T. 2013. Northern Ireland’s Lost Opportunity: The Frustrated Promise of Political Loyalism. London: Pluto Press.
O’Hearn, D. 2006. Bobby Sands: Nothing But An Unfinished Song. London: Pluto Press.
Purbrick, L. 2004. The Architecture of Containment. In The Maze, ed. D. Wylie, 91–110. London: Granta Books.
Reed, R. 2011. Blood, Thunder and Rosettes: The Multiple Personalities of Paramilitary Loyalism Between 1971 and 1988. Irish Political Studies 26 (1): 45–71.
———. 2015. Paramilitary Loyalism: Identity and Change. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Ryder, C. 2000. Inside the Maze: The Untold Story of the Northern Ireland Prison Service. London: Methuen.
Sinnerton, H. 2002. David Ervine: Uncharted Waters. London: Brandon Press.
Smith, W. 2014. Inside Man: Loyalists of Long Kesh – The Untold Story. Newtownards: Colourpoint Press.
Snodden, M. 1996. Culture Behind the Wire. Journal of Prisoners on Prison, Special Issue, Loyalist Prisoners of War 7 (2): 25–29.
Sykes, G.M. 2006. The Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security Prison. In Prison Readings: A Critical Introduction to Prisons and Imprisonment, ed. Y. Jewkes and H. Johnston, 164–173. Portland: Willan Publishing.
Taylor, P. 2000. Loyalists. London: Bloomsbury.
UVF/RHC Agreement. 1972. Quoted in Balaclava Street Blog Post Entitled, The Ulster Volunteer Force/Red Hand Commando Agreement, 1 February 2014. Available at: https://balaclavastreet.wordpress.com/?s=UVF+RHC+agreement+1972. Accessed 08/04/2015.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hinson, E. (2020). ‘A Virtually Self-Contained Community’: Unorthodox Containment and Prisoner Autonomy in the Maze/Long Kesh Compounds. In: McCann, F. (eds) The Carceral Network in Ireland. Palgrave Studies in Prisons and Penology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42184-7_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42184-7_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-42183-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-42184-7
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)