Vol. 370 No. 4
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he is aware of the increasing number of Irish citizens being stopped, searched and questioned under the British Prevention of Terrorism Act; the action he intends taking in the matter; and the number of persons stopped during the years 1984, 1985 and 1986.
14.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if a submission has been made to the British authorities for the annual review of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 1984; if he will state the Government's attitude towards this Act; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 and 14 together.
No figures are available for the number of people, whatever their nationality, who are stopped, questioned or searched under the Prevention of Terrorism Act in Britain. The numbers of people detained in connection with terrorism in Northern Ireland have shown a steady decline since 1979 when 857 people were detained. In 1984, 159 people were detained; in 1985, 194 people were detained; and this year 182 people had been detained up to 30 September. I would point out that since March 1984 the Act no longer refers exclusively to terrorism in connection with Northern Ireland.
I am conscious that the possibility of abuse of powers and of discrimination against Irish citizens is inherent in the PTA legislation and in consequence, I make representations concerning the scope and method of operation of the Act to the British Government on a regular and ongoing basis. These representations have been aimed at ensuring that the legislation is applied in an equitable manner and that abuses are avoided. The measures necessary to defend lives and property from IRA and other terrorists violence in Britain are a matter for the British Parliament and Government.
Steps have been taken to appraise the British Government of the Government's views concerning the PTA in the context of the annual review now being conducted by Lord Colville.
Is the Minister aware that a number of Irish citizens have been detained for long periods before being brought to trial? Is he aware of the increase in the number of PTA arrests and the number of Irish citizens being stopped, searched and questioned under that Act? For example, in 1985 55,000 people were arrested under the Act while in 1984 the figure was 47,000. Will the Minister agree that the operation of the PTA is an issue of priority given the lack of response to demands for justice in the Guildford four and Annie Maguire cases? The Minister mentioned the annual review of the Act and I should like to know if he is aware that the debate in the British Parliament has been brought forward to February, something that has taken people by surprise? Is the Minister aware that submissions have to be made to Lord Colville not later than tomorrow due to other commitments by that individual? Has the Minister made any submissions to Lord Colville?
Yes, we made a submission about a fortnight ago. The Irish Ambassador in London went with a long submission to Lord Colville on the renewal of the PTA which, as the Deputy said, will come up in February for debate. Lord Colville's report must be with the British Government in mid-January. With regard to the figures quoted by the Deputy I should like to state that I am not sure how anybody can compile such figures. I am aware of where the Deputy got the figures.
I got them from the Irish Commission for Prisoners Overseas and other groups.
I know where the Deputy got his figures from but I cannot see how anybody can authoritatively compose figures of those who were stopped and searched but not detained. It does not seem possible to be able to do that. I accept that the figures quoted by Deputy Andrews have been published. The point about the PTA is that every democracy has to introduce legislation to protect itself against violance and the British Government have done that. We have Acts on our Statute Book that have the same aim. I am concerned to see that the Act is not used against the Irish community in Britain, the vast majority of whom are extremely good citizens and law abiding. I am concerned to see that the Act is not used as a trawl to gather in Irish people on an information-seeking basis. We have expressed that concern to the British Government in regard to the PTA. There have been improvements in its operation in recent years and it no longer exclusively applies to those engaged in violence in the North of Ireland. However, a number of matters concern us. One is that a person detained under that Act can be held in communicado for 48 hours. We have a much more liberal regime in that regard. I should like to add that we do make very strong and lengthy representations about the Act and we have done so to Lord Colville who is reviewing it, always recognising the right of a democracy to introduce laws to defend itself against terrorism.
Is the Minister aware of the nine cases brought to the attention of the British Commission, people who were arrested and detained under the PTA and released after periods ranging from four to 15 months in custody when they were declared innocent of vague conspiracy charges? Do such occurrences worry the Minister? Will the Minister explain the attitude of the Government to the renewal of the Act particularly in view of the lack of response by the British authorities to the cases of the Maguire family, the Guildford four and the Birmingham six, people who have served more than ten years in jail in Britain? In that context does the Minister feel that the PTA should be renewed? Have the Government a policy on that? Are they for or against its renewal?
In the course of my reply I outlined the Government's position on this. We recognise the right of democracies to defend themselves against terrorism. I do not think there is a direct relevance between the Maguire, Guildford and Birmingham cases to the PTA although I understand why the Deputies should mention them. With regard to the other nine cases I should like to state that one of our early concerns about the operation of the PTA was that so many were detained under it and so few charged. We were concerned that so many people were being brought in, held and released without being charged. That has changed; fewer people are being brought in and a higher percentage of those taken in are being charged. The Act is operating in the way we would expect it to.
What about the rate of convictions?
I do not have the figures for that.
I am not going to allow this to go on. I will allow Deputies Gregory and David Andrews to put one brief question each before I move on.
Is the Minister saying that he, and the Government, are in favour of the renewal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act?
The Deputy could not possibly deduce that from what I said. It is most regrettable that the Deputy should try to put words in my mouth.
The Minister will not answer the question I put to him.
I have answered that question three times and the Deputy should not go on like this. It is an insult to the House to try to put such an impression on the record.
The Minister told us that he made submission to Lord Colville and I should like to know if it is confidential or if the Minister can give information about it to the House? Can we have the Minister's mind on the submission to Lord Colville? Without being critical of the Chair I must point out that the Chair ruled out a question of mine on the Birmingham six, the Guildford four and the Annie Maguire case on the basis that they had been raised a number of weeks ago but I must point out that there is serious concern about the lack of progress in coming to a resolution about those cases. In the context of the PTA, something must be said about those cases. I know that some people take a certain view of those of us who are pursuing justice on behalf of those people and they do not include the Minister.
I have allowed the Deputy to ask a number of questions in the form of statements and I permitted him to ask one short question.
I know people can become bored when they hear these issues raised continuously but this is the only way we can get justice for those people. However, I am not accusing the Minister in regard to that; he has been more than helpful but I would appreciate a response to the first part of my question.
It is not a question of being bored but of keeping order in the House.
I am not sure if I gave the impression that I went to see Lord Colville but if I did I did not mean to. The Irish Ambassador made representations on behalf of the Irish Government along the lines of the statements I made in the House, that the Act should not be used to trawl in Irish people and where people are brought in and detained they should have charges preferred against them, if that is what the police have in mind. We expressed our concern that under the Act people can be kept in communicado for 48 hours which would not be the case here. We have been making the same case with some success over the years and I hope we will have more success this year.
