Vol. 250 No. 7
asked the Minister for External Affairs if he will now disclose the terms of the notification to the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe of Ireland's intention to derogate from the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of the right not to be imprisoned without trial and the Secretary-General's reply.
10.
asked the Minister for External Affairs why Ireland's permanent representative to the Council of Europe was instructed to notify that body of Ireland's intention to derogate from the European Convention on Human Rights.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 10 together.
The Goverment foresaw the possibility of a situation developing in which they would be obliged to take measures derogating from some of their obligations under the Convention and felt that, in the interest of maximum co-operation, they should inform the Secretary-General not of an intention to derogate from the Convention but of the possibility of their being obliged to do so. Copies of the letter to the Secretary-General from the permanent representative and of the reply have been placed in the Dáil Library. In the event that the Government do in fact take measures in derogation of the Convention they will of course inform the Secretary-General as required by article 15 (3) of the Convention.
Will the Minister state why notice was given having regard to the fact that article 15 of the Convention does not require notice to be given until after measures are taken?
A thing called "courtesy".
Will the Minister state why, if it was considered necessary to give notice, it was not considered necessary to have regard to the obligation fully to inform the Secretary-General of the reasons?
As a matter of courtesy, the Secretary-General was informed of the possibility of the Government doing this, if they were obliged to do it. That is precisely what happened.
As a matter of "publicity".
Would the Minister state why regard was not had to the obligation to specify the particular provisions of the European Convention in respect of which it was proposed to derogate?
That does not arise until the actual notice of the position. This was not a notice. This was information furnished, as a matter of courtesy, as to the possibility of notice having to be served.
Are we to take it that the Government now accept there is no international obligation? Is the Minister aware that the considered view of well-informed people is that further total unnecessary harm has been done to this country's reputation abroad by the Government's unnecessary, inept and reckless abuse of an international convention for the purpose of engaging in some strange, weird, secret domestic policy of their own?
Hear, hear.
The elected Government of the Irish people have very real responsibilities at home. It is not proposed to engage in any dereliction of duty.
You have washed your dirty linen in international waters. You have done harm to the country.
You are doing it now. Your lack of responsibility is evident. Less of that.
Is any consideration being given by the Government to the withdrawal of this notice or does a situation still exist which warrants its continuance?
That is a separate question.
It is not a notice.
It is a notice of intention.
It is not a notice.
It is a gross abuse of an international instrument.
The Deputy has used the platform of Strasbourg to do harm to this country.
We certainly will not defend this abroad.
Question No. 11.
