I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
This is an enabling Bill, enabling Ireland to ratify the 1995 Europol Convention and related Protocols. The convention provides a framework for law enforcement co-operation in the field of international organised crime. It provides for the establishment of Europol on a statutory basis to facilitate the exchange of information and intelligence between the law enforcement authorities of the member states of the European Union and to carry out in-depth analyses on the crimes within its remit. Europol's central objective will be to assist member states in preventing and combating serious organised international crime affecting two or more member states.
As a small island nation on the periphery of Europe, we might like to regard ourselves as, in some way, immune or removed from the full effects of international crime. The reality is different. There is reason to believe that our geography lends itself to Ireland being used by highly organised criminals as a gateway to and from the rest of Europe, leaving us exposed to all forms of international crime. This is particularly the case in the area of drug trafficking where Ireland's extensive coastline has been used for the importation of large quantities of illegal drugs for use not only here but also in other European countries causing untold misery and, sometimes, death of our young people. Also, we are beginning to see Ireland becoming a focus for illegal immigrant smugglers. It is all too clear to us that a small country cannot tackle these problems effectively on its own. We need to share information and intelligence with other countries on the operations of these criminals, their modus operandi, their networks and the routes they use.
Organised crime, particularly crimes such as drug trafficking which generate large financial profits, is especially hard to combat. These criminals have vast resources at their disposal often exceeding those of states. They are very versatile and exploit weaknesses or loopholes wherever they exist. They have the resources to employ skilled people and to use a sinister carrot and stick approach by way of bribery and threats, to overcome any obstacles in their way. It would be naive to think that such ruthless criminals could be defeated by anything other than an energetic, pro-active and multi-faceted approach, embracing effective international co-operation and a zero tolerance policy here. My policy includes both of these elements.
The ratification of the Europol Convention, on which I will elaborate further, will be a milestone in the development of co-oporation between the 15 EU member states in the fight against international organised crime. It will not only enhance the flow of information and intelligence but will give significant added-value to these through in-depth analysis with the aid of a sophisticated computed system.
As any police or customs officer will tell us, access to intelligence and information is essential in the tackling of organised crime, be it on a domestic or an international scale. It is crucial when crime goes beyond national boundaries. Criminals exploit weaknesses in our legal systems. They use sophisticated aliases. They develop complex trafficking routes, often zig-zagging through several countries, to avoid detection. National boundaries are no obstacle to them. It is one of the tools they use to defeat the law enforcement authorities. We must fight back. The pooled information which Europol will have and the added-value it will give to it through in-depth analysis of criminal organisations, their modus operandi, ever changing trafficking routes and personnel will be of major assistance to all member states.
The convention also includes provisions which will enable Europol to give and receive information from international organisations, for example, Interpol, and countries outside the European Union, subject to certain safeguards. This will assist in tackling crime on a world scale. This is particularly relevant in tackling drug trafficking and money laundering. With the exception of synthetic drugs and home grown cannabis, all drugs of abuse are produced outside the European Union. In the case of money laundering, vast sums of money can be transferred in a matter of seconds by electronic wire transfer not only from one country to another but through several countries anywhere in the world and through an intricate series of financial companies. Ratification of the Europol Convention will be a significant step in tackling these crimes.
In the recent past what the policy of zero tolerance means in the fight against crime has been the subject of heated debate. There have been misinterpretations and misrepresentations by certain members of the Opposition. The concept of zero tolerance is, above all else, directed at positive action against serious criminals, especially those involved in the drugs trade and organised crime. My clear objective is to provide the Garda with the means, equipment and manpower to investigate all crime. My objective is to ensure that all crime is investigated, where possible, detected and, where the interests of justice and society so require, prosecuted. The victims of housebreakers, burglars and car thieves do not regard these crimes as trivial or minor and neither does the Government. It is entirely disingenuous of Opposition politicians to claim, as they have done in recent times, that the policy has somehow been put on the back burner and confined to the issue of drugs. I repeat that no form of wrongdoing is acceptable and none will be tolerated. If that were the case, this House would not have passed laws which state quite the opposite.
I intend to take seriously the duty of the State to protect the citizen's right to live in peace free from the fear of criminal intrusion. Time and again I have said that in the hierarchy of obligations the obligation of a sovereign Government to protect its people and their property is a superior one.
It is true, however, that by far the worst form of intrusion at this moment in our history is by thugs involved in drugs and other organised crime. None of us in this House, irrespective of our political differences, would seek to minimise the damage being done by these people. They blight and often destroy young lives and, thereby, sentence entire communities in city and country to an intolerable existence. Recent research has shown again that drugs are responsible for up to two thirds of all crime.
The zero tolerance approach I advocated in Opposition and which I now advocate in Government is about action on the ground and, by way of legislation, curbing drug dealers and other criminals. Citizens demand that and they are entitled to it. I want zero tolerance to meet that demand in full.
The Government is committed to the following items as part of the successful implementation of its programme. One thousand more prison places will be provided in two years. This means we will increase the current number of prison places by 50 per cent and that will be a significant achievement providing in excess of 3,000 prison places. That will have a considerable bearing on the scandal of temporary release as currently operated.
We intend to increase Garda numbers to 12,000 over a period of five years. We intend giving agency status to the prison service and the courts to help them function more efficiently. We intend to encourage serious Garda operational initiatives to strengthen their hand in fighting serious crime. We will be presenting an imaginative and innovative legislative programme on which I will now expand to some extent.
I am determined to fine comb the criminal law to remove every obstacle which exists to the fast, efficient and fair administration of justice and to close off any loopholes being exploited by criminals. As legislators, we must ensure that the fight against crime is enhanced by our work. The Government has already approved the final drafting of the Criminal Justice Bill, 1997 on the basis of detailed proposals which I have submitted.
During the summer months a considerable amount of time was spent by me and my officials in drafting this extremely important legislation as one of the pillars of the zero tolerance policy. This major piece of criminal law will be introduced as early as possible in the current session. It will contain measures in relation to speedier trials, minimum ten year sentences for serious drug trafficking offences, initiation by the courts of inquiries into the assets of persons convicted of drug trafficking and other serious offences and allowing technical evidence to be given by gardaí by certificate in court, thus freeing up their time to attend to other duties. These proposals will clearly give effect to a number of commitments contained in the Government's programme in the context of the policy of zero tolerance, particularly against drug pushers and other serious criminals.
Other criminal law reform Bills which I propose to publish either in this session or early in the next session include a revised Juvenile Justice Bill, a Bill to deal with child pornography, a Bill to amend the law in relation to criminal insanity, a Bill to enable Ireland to co-operate with the International War Crimes Tribunals and the United Nations Convention against Torture Bill.
Work is also well under way on legislative proposals to deal with the substantive law on fraud. A discussion paper to review the law on sexual offences is being drawn up. Extradition treaties with Canada and South Africa are being negotiated. In addition, a review is ongoing of criminal law issues relevant to the fight against crime.
To return to the Bill, the approach is to give the Convention and its two subsequent Protocols the force of law in the State and to provide for certain ancillary matters. The Bill itself, therefore, is comparatively short. For ease of reference the Convention and Protocols are appended to the Bill in both English and Irish, the texts being equally authentic in both languages.
Before turning to the detail of the individual sections, I propose to give the background to the drawing up of the Europol Convention and then to concentrate on the provisions of the Convention and its subsequent Protocols. The creation of the Single Market and the breakdown in borders within the European Union have facilitated an unprecedented increase in cross-border crime. Just as honest, law-abiding citizens can now move easily from one country to another within the Union, so also can Europe's criminals. The Justice and Home Affairs Ministers of member states were acutely aware of the need for compensatory measures to prevent the exploitation of this free movement by criminals and to protect their citizens against organised crime. This led to a decision to establish Europol by the European Council at its meeting in Maastricht in December 1991.
From November 1993 onwards, work on the draft Convention was continued within the structures provided for in Title Vl of the Treaty on European Union. In December 1993 the European Council meeting in Brussels decided that Europol would have its seat in The Hague. It was to be some considerable time yet, however, before agreement could be reached amongst the EU member states on Europol's precise role and powers.
Meanwhile, and in anticipation of the time it would take for the Convention to be concluded and ratified, the Europol Drugs Unit or EDU was set up by ministerial agreement of the then 12 member states. The purpose of the EDU was to allow information to be exchanged concerning, initially, illicit drug trafficking and associated money-laundering activities involving two or more member states. Its mandate was extended in March 1995 by the European Council to include illicit trafficking in nuclear and radioactive substances, crimes involving illegal immigration networks and trafficking in stolen vehicles. These crimes are of major concern to EU member states. They are also frequently committed by the same organised criminal groups. Often the same trafficking routes and distribution networks are used by unscrupulous criminals who will smuggle drugs, people, stolen vehicles and radioactive substances into and around the EU for financial gain. The aim of the criminals is to get their hands on the vast sums of money which accrue from these criminal activities. The EDU's mandate was further extended in December 1996 to include trafficking in human beings, following the horrific paedophile incidents in Belgium which were uncovered last year.
The EDU, which is now in its fourth year of operation in The Hague, has led to considerable successes, particularly in combating drug trafficking and money laundering. The EDU was only ever meant to operate as an interim measure, however, with the result that it operates on a more limited basis than will Europol under the convention. Its most obvious drawbacks are that it has no legislative status and it cannot store personal information. Once in force, the convention will effectively replace the EDU. The advantages of supplanting the EDU with Europol will include not just giving it a firm, statutory basis for its activities or the ability to store personal information, but also the provision of a sophisticated computer system, access to and analysis of pooled data, and liaison with countries outside the EU and with international organisations.
Once the convention is in force, Europol's initial remit will cover illicit drug trafficking, trafficking in nuclear and radioactive substances, illegal immigrant smuggling, motor vehicle crime, trafficking in human beings and associated money laundering activities — the forms of international crime already covered by the EDU. In addition, it will develop specialist knowledge of the investigative procedures of the relevant authorities in the member states, provide advice on investigations, provide strategic intelligence and prepare general situation reports. Within two years at the latest of entry into force, Europol's remit will be extended to terrorism. Furthermore, there is provision in the convention for Europol to take on a wide range of other forms of serious organised crime at the discretion of the Council of Ministers.
As to how Europol will achieve its objectives, I emphasise that Europol is established to operate as a non-operational team with the primary tasks of facilitating the exchange of information and intelligence between law enforcement authorities and carrying out detailed analyses in relation to the crimes within its remit. I am mentioning this because, as some Deputies know, it is likely that the role of Europol in the field of law enforcement co-operation may in the future be enhanced arising from provisions in the Amsterdam Treaty agreed by the Intergovernmental Conference last June and due to be signed by member states this Thursday. Any developments concerning the extension of Europol's competence would, however, require in the first instance consensus or unanimity among EU member states and they would have to be dealt with by separate legislation in this House. They do not, therefore, affect the passage of this Bill since it is concerned with giving the force of law to the 1995 convention.
The convention in Article 8 provides for member states to forward information to Europol concerning persons who are suspected of having committed or taken part in criminal offences in respect of which Europol is competent or have been convicted of such offences, or in relation to persons who there are serious grounds for believing will commit such criminal offences in the future. In addition, Europol is to be informed of the means used in committing crimes, suspected membership of criminal organisations and criminal convictions of such persons.
The information will be collated by Europol in a central computerised database consisting of three elements. The first element will be an information system with a restricted and precisely defined content which allows rapid reference to the information available to the member states and Europol or, as it is sometimes referred to, an outer ring of information. The second component will concern more sensitive information, a so-called inner ring of information comprising work files for the purposes of analysis containing comprehensive information. Lastly, there will be an index system containing certain particulars from the analysis files. Specialists will analyse the information with a view to making connections and arrive at an overview, the results of which will then be forwarded to the member states concerned.
Member states will send liaison officers to Europol who will assist in the exchange of information and analysis work. Each member state must also set up a national unit to act as the centralised contact point for all relations with Europol. The liaison officer will represent the interests of his or her particular national unit. This is a formalisation of the arrangements which at present exist for the EDU. This system operates not only to communicate information, but the liaison officers are also a valuable tool in overcoming problems which may arise between member states, for example, because of having insufficient knowledge of each other's legal system.
In addition to liaison officers representative of each member state, Europol will employ analysts who will be under the Europol director's authority. The director will be appointed by the Council of Ministers for Justice and Home Affairs and will be accountable to it. There will also be a management board comprising representatives of all the member states of the Union.
Europol will only be as good as its information. It is imperative, therefore, that adequate safeguards are in place to guarantee the confidentiality and security of information exchanged and shared. In this regard the convention lays down extensive safeguards. It acknowledges that particular attention must be paid to the privacy rights of individuals and the protection of their personal information. It requires that, as a minimum, each member state must ensure a standard of data protection at least as high as that required by the 1981 Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data. That convention is implemented here by the Data Protection Act, 1988. In addition, each member state must appoint a national supervisory body to monitor independently under national law the communication of personal data to and from Europol. There will also be a joint supervisory body to monitor the activities of Europol as a whole to ensure that the rights of individuals are not violated by storage and processing of personal data.
Rules governing liability are laid down in the event of damage being caused by unauthorised or incorrect use of data. Finally, confidentiality is also protected by rules governing the dissemination of sensitive information and the obligation of discretion imposed upon employees of Europol and liaison officers.
I now turn to the two Protocols to the convention, starting with the Protocol on the interpretation of the convention by the European Court of Justice. One difficulty which delayed the finalisation of the convention was the failure of member states to agree on whether the European Court of Justice should have a role in relation to the Europol Convention. The Protocol solved this outstanding problem by giving member states the option to declare to accept or not the interpretation of the convention by the European Court of Justice by way of preliminary rulings. For those member states which opted to accept the court's jurisdiction, they could make a further declaration setting out the conditions under which the jurisdiction of the court would operate in their country, either at the request of all national courts or at the request only of courts against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy. In our case, we opted for the latter course so as to ensure, as far as possible, that there will be as little disruption as possible to the progress of a criminal trial once commenced.
The Protocol on the privileges and immunities of Europol, its organs, its deputy directors and employees is needed for the practical application of the Europol Convention once it enters into force. The purpose of the Protocol is to grant Europol and all those acting on its behalf the same type of privileges and immunities as are usually granted to international organisations. In addition to the two Protocols to which this Bill will give the force of law, there are a number of other legal texts necessary for Europol's operation. These deal with implementing measures concerning the rights and obligations of liaison officers, staff regulations, rules for analysis of data, confidentiality rules, rules of procedure of the joint supervisory body, Europol's budget, Europol's headquarters, agreement between it and the Netherlands, and bilateral agreements between the Netherlands and member states concerning privileges and immunities of liaison officers and their families.
Of those still to be finalised are: the confidentiality rules; the rules of procedure of the joint supervisory body; the headquarters agreement; and agreements concerning privileges and immunities of liaison officers. All of the measures must be formally adopted by the Justice and Home Affairs Council before Europol can take up its activities. Luxembourg aims to have negotiations on the outstanding texts completed during its Presidency. Having said that, while the legal texts are a prerequisite to Europol's entry into force, they are not necessary to the ratification process, and each member state can proceed with ratification of the convention and its two Protocols without the various implementation measures being finalised.
That brings me to the question of when the convention will enter into force; when Europol will take up its activities. Its entry into force is dependent on ratification by all 15 member states. At present, the United Kingdom is the only member state to have formally ratified, but several further ratifications are expected during the coming months. My intention is that on the enactment of this Bill, Ireland's ratification procedure will be in place before the end of the year. This would keep us in line with the European Council's stated aim of ratification by all member states before the end of 1997.
The explanatory memorandum circulated with the Bill earlier this month contains a detailed commentary on the individual sections and their related provisions in the convention. The approach adopted in the Bill is to give the convention and the two Protocols the force of law in the State. Section 2 contains this core provision.
Section 3 is concerned with the national unit which will act as a centralised unit within the Garda Síochána for channelling information and intelligence to and from Europol. The section proposes that the unit be headed up by a garda of at least Chief Superintendent rank, and that it operate under the authority of the Garda Commissioner. However, the assignment of staff to the unit will not be confined to members of the Garda Síochána. Members of other services with specialist expertise — officers of customs and excise, for example — could clearly have a very important role to play in respect of certain types of crime. For that reason, the Bill enables the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, following consultation with the Garda Commissioner and the Minister for Finance, to appoint non-Garda personnel to be members of the unit.
Section 4 provides for sending liaison officers from the national unit to Europol. Liaison officers need not necessarily be members of the Garda Síochána and could potentially be members of customs and excise.
Section 5 is a technical provision amending certain sections of the Garda Síochána Act, 1989, to enable their application to members of the Force who are serving with Europol.
Sections 6 and 7 are concerned with data protection. The main purpose of section 6 is to apply the Data Protection Act, 1988, to relevant provisions in the convention subject to modification where necessary. As already stated, the 1988 Act gave effect to the principles contained in the 1981 Council of Europe Convention on Data Protection, which is the standard of protection laid down by the convention. Section 7 designates the Data Protection Commissioner for the purposes of the Convention so that he will be empowered to monitor implementation of the data protection provisions.
Section 8 gives Europol corporate status to enable it to enter into contracts and other commercial relationships and to sue and be sued in the courts. There is provision in section 9 for the application of the Official Secrets Act, 1963 to those provisions of the convention which impose obligations of confidentiality not to make disclosures of information.
Turning to the Protocol on the interpretation of the convention by the European Court of Justice, section 10 provides that judicial notice shall be taken in this country of any ruling or decision or expression of opinion by that court.
There is provision in sections 11 and 12 for making ministerial orders, to be laid before both Houses, which appear to be necessary and expedient for carrying out the convention. All matters of substance pertaining to the convention and its Protocols are covered by the Bill. The purpose of the provisions in sections 11 and 12 is merely to enable incidental requirements from time to time.
Section 13 contains the standard expenses provision. The financial arrangements for Europol provide for annual estimates to be drawn up and approved by the Justice and Home Affairs Council. The budget will be financed from member states' contributions, which are determined by reference to a formula of the percentage of GNP attributed to each. While additional cost will arise in respect of Europol's new computer system, in the absence of experience of operating the convention, it is impossible to say what level of contribution we will be obliged to make. Some indications, however, may be gained from our current contributions to the EDU's budget. The EDU budget for 1997, when savings made last year are taken into account, is ECU 7 million, 0.7 per cent of which we pay for from the Garda Síochána Vote.
This is the first occasion on which a Bill concerning a convention under Title Vl of the Treaty on European Union has been introduced in the Oireachtas. The convention is a very desirable measure which will provide a weapon to Ireland and its EU partners for combating international organised crime. It will provide for greatly enhanced co-operation among the 15 member states at a level commensurate with the threat posed by the increasingly sophisticated techniques of today's organised criminals.
The Bill will be acceptable to all sides of the House. I shall give careful consideration to the points which Deputies may make and to any suggestions for amendment that may be made in the course of the debate. I commend the Bill to the House.
I congratulate to Deputies Jim Higgins and Shortall on their appointment as spokespersons on Justice, Equality and Law Reform by their respective parties. They follow in auspicious footsteps. I look forward to robust and constructive debate in this House and outside in respect of tackling crime.
