I move:
That Dáil Éireann resolves that sections 2 to 4, 6 to 12, 14 and 17 of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 (No. 39 of 1998) shall continue in operation for the period of 12 months beginning on 30th June, 2011.
The resolution before the Dáil seeks approval for the continuance in operation of those sections of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 which would otherwise cease to be in operation after 30 June. Deputies will be aware that this legislation was enacted in the aftermath of the Omagh bombing in August 1998, a dreadful atrocity which claimed 29 innocent lives and injured more than 200 people. The attack at Omagh was a callous act of mass murder aimed at undermining the then developing peace process. If anything, its brutality galvanised the already strong desire of both communities on this island for a shared future based on peace and democracy. It is a testament to the resolve of those parties who supported the peace process that not only did it survive this attack, it flourished and great advances have been made in normalising politics in Northern Ireland. We must never forget, however, the suffering of so many people who were bereaved by the mindless criminality of the very few.
Recognising the exceptional nature of the measures contained in the 1998 Act, it was decided that certain sections of the Act should be revisited annually by the Oireachtas. The purpose is to allow the Oireachtas to decide whether the current circumstances justify the continued operation of these sections. I have no doubt that their continued operation is justified and will outline my reasons to the House presently.
To support consideration of the need for the renewal of these sections of the Act, I am required to lay a report on their operation before both Houses prior to the resolutions being moved. The report, which I laid before the House on 13 June 2011, covers the period since the last such report was prepared in June 2010 to 31 May 2011. The clear message from the report is that the relevant sections of the Act continue to be of significant value to the Garda in tackling the threat from terrorism. Taking into account the provisions of the Act, the numbers of occasions on which certain provisions have been used and the current security environment, the Garda authorities consider that the Act continues to be one of the most important tools available to them in the ongoing fight against terrorism. The inevitable conclusion must be that the provisions are necessary to counter the threat from terrorism and their continued availability to An Garda Síochána is warranted.
The sad fact is that there is an ongoing threat, both in this jurisdiction and in Northern Ireland, from a variety of subversive paramilitary groups. The Real IRA, the Continuity IRA and other groups remain resolutely committed to violence in pursuit of their aims. They continue to seek to acquire and manufacture weapons and to plant explosive devices without any concern for life or limb. In particular, they have targeted members of the security forces in Northern Ireland. The recent tragic murder of PSNI Constable Ronan Kerr is a stark demonstration of their ongoing murderous intent. Put plainly, these are gangs of criminal terrorists. I use the word "criminal" because these groups are involved in a wide range of organised criminal activities and I believe that, in many cases, their continued commitment to the so-called cause is centred more on preserving their personal positions. These groups represent nothing but their own warped views of the world. Their actions display nothing but contempt for the peace-loving majority on this island.
The 1998 Act was brought in following the Omagh bombing and was mainly targeted at domestic terrorist groups. However, we cannot ignore the threat from international terrorism and should not imagine that Ireland is completely immune from it. We certainly must not be complacent in responding to it. The Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005 enables the application against international terrorist groups and individuals of the Offences against the State Acts, including the provisions under consideration today.
I return to the provisions which are the subject of the resolution. The report I laid before the House is based on data received from the Garda authorities and shows the following information. Section 2 was used on 48 occasions. Section 2 provides that where, in any proceedings for membership of an unlawful organisation, an accused fails to answer or gives false or misleading answers to any question, the court may draw such inferences as appear proper. However, a person cannot be convicted of the offence solely on an inference drawn from such a failure. Section 3 was used on 12 occasions. This section provides that, in proceedings for membership of an unlawful organisation, an accused must give notification of an intention to call a person to give evidence on his behalf, unless the court permits otherwise. Section 7 was used on 24 occasions. This section makes it an offence to possess articles in circumstances giving rise to a reasonable suspicion that the article is in possession for a purpose connected with the commission, preparation or instigation of specified firearms or explosives offences. Section 8 was used once. This section makes it an offence to collect, record or possess information which is likely to be useful to members of an unlawful organisation in the commission of serious offences. Section 9 was used on 63 occasions. This section makes it an offence to withhold information which a person believes might be of material assistance in preventing the commission of a serious offence or securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of another person for such an offence.
Section 10 was used on 12 occasions. This section extends the maximum period of detention permitted under section 30 of the Offences against the State Act from 48 hours to 72 hours, but only on the authorisation of a judge of the District Court. The judge must be satisfied, on the application of a garda not below the rank of superintendent, that further detention is necessary for the proper investigation of the offence concerned and that the investigation is being conducted diligently and expeditiously. The person being detained is entitled to be present in court during the application and to make submissions or have them made on his behalf. In the reporting period in question, an extension under section 10 was applied for and granted in 12 cases and charges resulted in six of those cases.
Section 11 was used on five occasions. This section allows a judge of the District Court to permit the re-arrest and detention of a person in respect of an offence for which he was previously detained under section 30 of the Offences against the State Act but released without charge. This further period must not exceed 24 hours and can only be authorised in circumstances where the judge is satisfied on information supplied on oath by a member of the Garda Síochána that further information has come to the knowledge of the Garda about that person's suspected participation in the offence. Section 14 is a procedural section which makes the offences created under sections 6 to 9, inclusive, and 12 of the 1998 Act scheduled offences for the purposes of Part V of the 1939 Act. The sum total of the uses of sections 6 to 9, inclusive, and 12 was 88.
I now turn to those sections of the 1998 Act that were not used in the period under report, namely, sections 4, 6, 12 and 17. Section 4 amends section 3 of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1972 to expand the definition of "conduct" that can be considered as evidence of membership of an unlawful organisation. Specifically, conduct can include matters such as "movements, actions, activities, or associations on the part of the accused". This change simply aligns the definition of conduct in the 1972 Act with the reference to movements, actions, activities or associations used in section 2 of the 1998 Act.
Section 6 creates the offence of directing the activities of an organisation in respect of which a suppression order has been made under the Offences against the State Act 1939. Section 12 makes it an offence for a person to instruct or train another person in the making or use of firearms or explosives or to receive such training without lawful authority or reasonable excuse.
Section 17 builds on a provision in the Criminal Justice Act 1994 which empowers a court, in its discretion, to order the forfeiture of any property in the possession of a convicted person which was used, or intended to be used, to facilitate the commission of an offence under that Act. The effect of section 17 is, in the case of a person convicted of specified offences relating to the possession of firearms or explosives, and where there is property liable to forfeiture under the 1994 Act, to require the court to order the forfeiture of such property unless it is satisfied that there would be a serious risk of injustice if it made such an order. Although these sections were not used in the period under report, I am sure Deputies will agree that their continued availability is essential to an effective response to the threat from terrorist groups.
I would be delighted to be able to inform Members that these provisions are no longer considered necessary. However, that would necessitate a very significant change of attitude on the part of these criminal terrorist groups. In the absence of such a change I could not, as Minister for Justice and Equality, recommend to the Dáil that valuable legislative provisions be allowed to lapse. I consider that the relevant provisions of the 1998 Act should remain in operation for a further 12 months and I commend this resolution to the House.
