Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 12 Oct 1978

Vol. 308 No. 2

Adjournment Debate. - Irish Passports.

Dr. Byrne

I raise this subject as the result of a certain amount of ambiguity that would appear to exist in relation to the availability of Irish passports for Irish citizens at present living in the State of Rhodesia. It has been apparent for some time that the Irish citizens in that State are not fully informed and/or fully aware of their rights in this matter. Successive Governments have not attempted to explain to these citizens in great detail the constitutional rights that exist in regard to their entitlement to an Irish passport. We have approximately 8,000 citizens living in Rhodesia and it has been the policy of the Department of Foreign Affairs not to issue passports to those Irish citizens whose activities might further encourage the unlawful actions of the illegal regime there. Can the Minister define activities that would further encourage unlawful actions of the illegal regime in Rhodesia? An Irish person employed as an officer of the civil service there who might have a house mortgage, have to pay school fees or insurance policies and loans to finance houses in that State is in a financial quagmire with the result that he is not in a position to leave that country if he wishes. I should like to know if he is alleged to be supporting an illegal regime? Is a person who ten years ago joined the police force, the armed forces or any section of the civil administration to be denied an Irish passport because the allegation can be made by the Department that he is inadvertantly encouraging the unlawful actions of an illegal regime?

Our attitude, and the policy of the Department in recent years, has been far too vague and requires clearer definition. It requires a stronger and clearcut statement by the Minister. Recently the Minister was engaged in an extensive tour of six countries in Africa during the course of which he met many Irish contingents. His trip was greatly appreciated by them. I should like to know if he met any deputations from the Irish people living in Rhodesia. I believe he may have met some people representing the Irish community living in the state of South Africa. It is important that it be pointed out that there are many Irish people living in Rhodesia who do not support apartheid but who, by virtue of economic factors that existed at the time of their qualification from university, technical colleges or secondary schools, could not find employment here and had to seek work overseas. Indeed, they were encouraged to do so by successive Governments. Having found gainful employment those who went to Rhodesia now find themselves deprived of their constitutional right to an Irish passport.

In the course of his written reply to Question No. 324 yesterday the Minister said that every Irish citizen living abroad has a right of entry to this country and that he had always made it clear that any Irish person living in Rhodesia who wishes to settle in Ireland or otherwise leave Rhodesia permanently would be issued with an Irish passport in the usual way. In that statement we have the vagueness which has been characteristic of this section of foreign policy. A person does not need a passport to return to their own country but why does an Irish person living in Rhodesia have to state that he wishes to settle for the rest of his life in Ireland before he can obtain an Irish passport? Irish citizens living anywhere else in the world do not have to make that declaration. Why should an Irish citizen have to state to the Department that he will never return to Rhodesia where he may have relatives or may wish to attend funerals or sporting events?

In the light of the declaration by the illegal régime in Rhodesia that they are going to have full integration with regard to housing, schools and hospitals, that they are going to reform the Land Act and are initiating a general election with one man one vote, I suggest to the Minister that he render facile the availability of passports for all Irish citizens living in Rhodesia. We have seen the Minister's sincerity with regard to upholding the United Nations mandatory sanctions but what about our neighbour the UK, who, in a matter of months after the initiating of those sanctions, knew they were being broken? Has the Minister familiarised himself with the Bingham Report presented to the UK Government? In the light of the fact that the UN resolution responsible for these mandatory sanctions must be renewed in the near future and because a country who allegedly supported those sancions wilfully and knowingly broke them, is the Minister once again going to bring the Department, and the country, along like sheep, following one another?

I have been concerned for many years about our hospitality to and the way we appear to go out of our way at official level to visitors from Communist countries.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair allowed the Deputy to raise this question and I would ask him to stay within the terms of it. He is rambling away from it. The question deals with the issue of passports to Irish citizens in Rhodesia and the Deputy should stay on that topic.

Dr. Byrne

Some of the 8,000 Irish citizens in Rhodesia will not be able to obtain Irish passports because of the misinterpretation of the UN sanctions which have been broken by other countries. The Department wishes to appear to be the prize lamb by sticking to the letter of the law. The Department's approach to this issue is cumbersome, bureaucratic, over-elaborate and does not work. Our Department are not giving to our citizens in Rhodesia, whether they want to be there or not, the full facilities they need to obtain Irish passports, in a state which is under siege, and the Department do not have any contingency plans for the evacuation of our citizens should conditions deteriorate even further.

There is a twofold concept involved in denying Irish citizens Irish passports. One encourages them to dig in deeper and turn their backs on their homeland. As the Minister said in the last sentence of the second paragraph of his reply, in this connection it has been the policy of successive Irish Governments not to grant passport facilities to persons whose activities further or encourage the unlawful actions of the illegal régime in Rhodesia. We have seen the humbug associated with these sanctions. I call on the Minister to expedite any passport applications that are pending, to do away with the bureaucracy surrounding them, to do away with the over-elaborate mechanism for processing these applications and to give those Irish people their entitlement. Because they live there does not mean they support apartheid or that they are supporting the unlawful activities of an alleged illegal régime. I ask the Minister to grasp this nettle firmly and help those citizens.

If I or any other Irish person goes abroad with an Irish passport and it expires while I am abroad, I have always believed that, providing my conduct has been reasonably good, I can re-apply by post and have it brought up to date. The sanctions being brought in by the Minister are one-sided. I appeal to him to urgently consider doing away with unnecessary red tape and with any bias that may be felt towards people who, by virtue of geography, are hindered from obtaining these passports.

In conclusion I quote again what the Minister said, that is, that it has been the policy of successive Irish Governments not to grant passport facilities to persons whose activities further or encourage the unlawful actions of the illegal régime in Rhodesia. That covers a multitude. It cannot be defined exactly. Hence it is bureaucratic, cumbersome and over-elaborate.

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. O'Kennedy)

I want to reiterate that this is not a decision by this or any previous Government which we of our own judgment decided to impose on Rhodesia. This is a decision of the Security Council of the United Nations by which we as a member nation are bound. Therefore it is not a question, as the Deputy seemed to imply towards the end of his contribution, of our being bureaucratic in respect of the sanctions and making judgments that are too severe. These judgments were made not by us but by the family of the United Nations of a régime which has broken all the standards which we as a nation struggle for, and which many other nations are at present struggling for. That judgment imposes on us an obligation that we should take all possible measures to prevent the entry into our territory of persons whom we have reason to believe have furthered or encouraged, or who are likely to further or encourage, the unlawful activities of the illegal régime—the illegal régime, note—in Southern Rhodesia or any activities which are calculated to evade any measure decided upon in resolution 253 (1968) or resolution 232 (1966) of 16 December 1966.

Second, the Deputy seems to think, and I accept that his questions were prompted by his concern for the interests and safety of those people, that there is some ambiguity in this. I cannot imagine where that ambiguity lies. I thought my answer to his question very clearly indicated that it had been the policy of successive Irish Governments not to grant passport facilities to persons whose activities further or encourage the unlawful actions of the illegal régime in Rhodesia. Nevertheless every Irish citizen living abroad has a right of entry to this country. That is an unqualified right. I have always made it clear that any Irish person living in Rhodesia who wishes to settle in Ireland or leave Rhodesia permanently will be issued with an Irish passport in the usual way. If any ambiguity has arisen it is because the Deputy said that we were requiring a statement from these people that they would have to settle in Ireland permanently. What I said was that any citizen who wishes to settle in Ireland or leave Rhodesia permanently was entitled to an Irish passport. We are not obliging them to stay in Ireland permanently. I hope that point has been cleared up.

I want to answer the specific questions raised by the Deputy before I deal with the principles involved. He asked if I met deputations of Irish people in Rhodesia during the course of my recent visit to southern Africa and my answer is no. No deputations were sought. He mentioned that I met Irish groups in South Africa during my visit. I want to clarify that point. I know that the Deputy did not wish to imply that I was on a visit to South Africa. To gain access and exit to and from Lesotho and Swaziland, which I had to do on three occasions because I had to return to Nairobi for President Kenyatta's funeral, I had to pass through South Africa. I had the opportunity of speaking to some of our citizens there. What I heard from them—people who were concerned about the future of all people in that part of Africa—was very disquieting and has since proved to be all too accurate. I wanted to put that on the record in relation to my visit to Africa.

I hope the Deputy is aware of the fact that there is no question of these people living and working in Rhodesia having to give a guarantee that they will settle in Ireland permanently. It is important to establish that they will be welcome at home with or without a passport because they have the right to come home. The decisions here are not decisions taken by us but by the illegal Smith régime. They are the ones who have put themselves outside of the court of the standards being applied by the United Nations. I do not wish to make comments on other situations and other countries but I do say that we are bound by the mandatory sanctions of the Security Council.

One of the problems which most of these people have in Rhodesia—I think the Deputy touched on it—is that if they leave Rhodesia apparently they will not be allowed to bring any of their possessions with them. They will not be allowed to sell what they otherwise might sell and come home with sufficient money to set up in a new business. I want to say that that is not a decision of this Government. Apparently the position in Rhodesia is that as long as one stays one can literally live like a king—I think that is not overstating it—a white king but, as soon as one wants to leave, one must then revert to the role of pauper. That is not a decision taken by this Government or by the United Nations. It is a decision which has been taken by the Smith régime and is not one over which we have any control, regrettable though it is.

I would like to think that for those who wish to come home or to settle elsewhere they could do so with the security of finance or whatever else. But it is not our Government that has the control over these things. Perhaps those questions could be asked rather in Rhodesia than here. Nonetheless let me say that obviously the Government are concerned to ensure to the extent that we possibly can, in the event of certain dangers arising in Rhodesia—and anything that has happened in recent weeks or months unfortunately is not in any way reassuring—the safety of our citizens, as every other country must of theirs. The Deputy will appreciate—though he has not even asked for this—that I could not disclose at this stage whatever tentative arrangements we have made already and discussions we are having with a view to trying to foresee or overcome the possibilities of danger that would arise in such an event. No Irish Minister—or Minister from any other Government for that matter—can guarantee at all times the safety of an Irish citizen wherever he happens to be. Obviously that would be to ask the impossible. Accordingly I cannot guarantee the safety of any Irish citizen wherever he happens to be any more than any other Foreign Minister can guarantee the safety of his citizen in another country. What we can do is to ensure that if they wish to travel freely, provided they are adhering to the standards of the country in which they live, to the standards of international agreements and conventions, we will certainly give them that facility.

That there is an unfortunate problem in Rhodesia is all to obvious; that it may get worse is a matter of great concern for all of us. When the Deputy talks in terms of one man one vote in Rhodesia I have to say we are not debating the actual issue, that I think the Deputy is really going beyond the bounds of reality to imply that what we have now, or will have in the future, will be one man one vote of the kind that would enable the United Nations to lift the sanctions which have been imposed by way of mandatory obligation on Rhodesia.

I want to touch on one or two other matters and, if I may, spell out for the benefit of the Deputy and all who may be concerned the position as I have stated in my reply but also, if necessary, to add somewhat to it. If there are other countries which, for reasons best known to themselves, have not adhered to the standards expected of countries who are members of the United Nations and who have not applied consistently these sanctions that, I would suggest, is a matter for those countries to consider and answer for themselves and to their own public as well as to the international community. Surely it is not being suggested that, if there are countries that have failed to meet standards internationally accepted, the rest of us who try to be consistent should lower our standards or ask the United Nations to lower theirs. I can assure the Deputy that I will not under any circumstances ask the United Nations to change its position vis-à-vis Rhodesia. I would hope that perhaps developments there, on the basis of constitutional proposals that were being proposed, would enable Rhodesia to enable the United Nations to change its position on these sanctions.

Dr. Byrne

With your permission, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, might I ask the Minister a question?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If there is time I will give the Deputy an opportunity of asking a question, when the Minister concludes; there are four minutes left only.

Mr. O'Kennedy

The Deputy wants to ask a question so I had better finish in less than four minutes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If the Deputy would ask a short question—

Dr. Byrne

Firstly, the Minister is aware that I did mention contingency plans. Secondly, the Minister mentioned in his reply people permanently leaving Rhodesia. In those circumstances, how does a citizen indicate to the Minister's Department that they are permanently leaving a country? What type of document would be accepted by the Minister's Department prior to the issuing of the passport?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister to conclude. It is most unusual to have questions on an adjournment debate.

Mr. O'Kennedy

Here it is a matter of trust and good faith. If I may deal with that issue: in regard to any Irish person who wishes to settle in Ireland, or otherwise leave Rhodesia permanently, I would suspect that if they wish to settle in Ireland they are welcome to come here without passports. If they formally indicate to us that they are leaving Rhodesia permanently—

Dr. Byrne

Say they want to go to New Zealand.

Mr. O'Kennedy

Yes; they are going to leave Rhodesia permanently then certainly I think we could consider the application favourably. In the final analysis it is a matter for the Minister for Foreign Affairs, on the advice of his Department, to use his discretion in relation to the circumstances under which the passport will issue. But let me make this clear: we would have to consider all the circumstances to feel satisfied, as one reasonably could, that that in fact was the intention.

Dr. Byrne

Would they have to produce documents such as those required for the United States, an employer in New Zealand and a guarantor?

Mr. O'Kennedy

Obviously matters of that sort that would confirm that they had this intention. I want to say in relation to all this that, as the Deputy will be aware, one of the problems is that there is compulsory military service in Rhodesia. Anybody who is there between the ages of 18 and 50 is thereby obliged—and again this is not our rule—to serve in the army of the Rhodesian illegal régime. We do not issue pass ports to anybody who serves in the army of any state other than our own. Secondly, we certainly do not do it in respect of an illegal régime. It is because of the regulations which have been introduced by that régime that we are not in a position to issue passports.

Finally, I want to make it clear, that those Irish citizens—and many of those who are entitled to citizenship are so entitled by virtue of being the children or grandchildren of Irish citizens—who wish to come home to Ireland do not need passports. For those who wish to apply for passports to come home on the basis of what the Deputy has mentioned, certainly we would look at that very sympathetically. For those who, for one reason or another, do not choose to do that but who choose to stay there for as long as they can, we are still considering our obligation to the extent that we can in the event of a doomsday situation arising.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 17 October 1978.