asked the Minister for Justice in what circumstances members of the Garda Síochána assist in the prosecution of Irishmen in foreign courts; and if he will give details of all instances of such during the past six months.
Ceisteanna—Questions Oral Answers. - Prosecutions in Foreign Courts.
66.
It is normal procedure for one police force to assist another in the investigation of serious crime and in the prosecution of criminal offences, and the nationality of the offender in a particular case is not material. This principle is accepted in the Extradition Act, 1965, under which Irish citizens as well as others may be extradited to other countries.
During the past six months, there was only one case where assistance was given by the Garda Síochána in the prosecution of offences in foreign courts. Since the Deputy has already referred in this House to that case and argued that it was wrong that such assistance should be given in a case where the alleged offence was politically motivated, I would like to say that I accept the proposition that this is a relevant factor and that the giving of assistance in such a case would at least require special consideration and would be refused as a rule. However, this was a most exceptional case in that the alleged offence involved a major attempt to smuggle arms into Cobh in breach of the law of this State, though for legal reasons that I do not propose to go into, the people concerned could not be made amenable here. Arising out of the incident however, people were arrested in England.
Given the fact that what was attempted was primarily an attempt to contravene the law of this State in a most serious way and in circumstances in which prosecutions would certainly have been brought here if that were possible, we would clearly be stultifying ourselves if we then adopted the attitude that the Garda Síochána would refuse to give any assistance.
Essentially, therefore, the issue in this case was whether or not we were prepared to condone an effort to smuggle substantial quantities of arms into Cobh.
It appears from the end of the Minister's reply that the non-collaboration of our police force with the British police in this case would be a condoning of an attempt to smuggle arms. Since the attempt had already been foiled, how does the Minister square this with his statement that the non-cooperation of the English courts to prosecute Irishmen for attempting to bring in arms would be a condoning of arms being brought in?
This would appear to be a serious breach of our law inasmuch as the arms were being brought into this part of the country. We regard this as a serious matter and we cannot condone it.
Are we not overlooking the precept that all are innocent until proved guilty? The prosecution was taken by the English courts and the English police and we proceeded to assist them, no doubt on the basis that we had these people convicted in our minds prior to their coming before the courts. I put it to the Minister that there is a very strong belief, which I as well as others hold from information I have received, that there was an assurance sought and an assurance given in this case either by himself, on his behalf or by the Attorney General that no witnesses or material evidence would be produced by our police in those English courts to further the prosecution of these two Irishmen.
I certainly gave no such assurance and I am not aware that anybody else gave any such assurance. There are no records from which the information sought could be obtained.
Could I ask the Minister whether the long-standing decision that no collaboration would be forthcoming from the forces or the servants of this State in the prosecution of any persons on political charges associated with the Northern situation has been reversed or rescinded and has a new decision been taken that we will aid and abet and collaborate in the prosecution of people charged with political offences across the Channel?
Some of the terms used are, perhaps, unnessarily emotive, but as I made clear in my reply, if there is any question of an offence being politically motivated, the normal procedure has been and remains that the police in this part of the country do not give assistance. I also pointed out that this proposition is a relevant factor and that the giving of such assistance would at least require special consideration and would, as a rule, be refused. I went on to point out that this was a most exceptional case. Of course, I have no evidence to show that the very large quantity of arms which were brought into Cobh were destined for use in any particular place outside the jurisdiction. I would draw the House's attention to the provisions of the Firearms Act, 1971, which makes it clear that certain offences would be committed irrespective of where the proposed user of firearms might be.
Surely if that were so, extradition would be the course open to the Minister and to the State here if they wanted to get these people within their jurisdiction——
We cannot proceed on this basis.
I am advised that this is not so, because the people involved never left British territory. Even though they may have been within Irish territorial waters they were on a British ship.