Vol. 224 No. 2
I move:
That Seanad 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 beginning on 30th June 2013 and ending on 29th June 2014.’’.
The House will be aware that the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 was passed in the wake of the murder of 29 people by the Real IRA in Omagh on 15 August that year. It was a necessary response to that atrocity and the loss of 29 innocent lives. That bombing and those murders also represented a direct attack on the fragile peace process and the State as a major sponsor of it. They demanded a robust response from the State and a clear statement that the atavistic view of the murderers would not prevail. We had had enough of their agenda of hatred, sectarianism and contempt for the will of the majority. Like the rest of us, they had been given the opportunity to decide in a democratic way on the future of the island and the relationship between the two jurisdictions. Their views did not prevail and, like all anti-democrats, they resorted to murder and terror, but they were never going to succeed and they have not succeeded. However, to this day they continue with their ideology of hatred and destruction. At the time, 1998, the State had a responsibility to respond to the direct challenge they presented. One such response was to provide strong legislative powers to ensure the Garda and the courts would be in a position to meet that challenge. The Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 was a necessary and proportionate response. The Act contains a series of amendments to the Offences against the State Acts 1939 to 1985 to make them more responsive to the threat from certain groups. Principally, these amendments concern changes to the rules of evidence for certain offences under the Acts, including the drawing of inferences in certain circumstances; the creation of new offences such as directing an unlawful organisation, possession of certain articles and collecting information; and extending the maximum period of detention permitted under section 30 of the 1939 Act to 72 hours.
Section 18 of the 1998 Act, as amended by section 37 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999, provides that sections 2 to 4, 6 to 12 and 14 and 17 must be renewed by the Oireachtas at specified intervals if they are to remain in force. By virtue of resolutions passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas on 13 and 20 June 2012, these sections were continued in force for a period of 12 months, beginning on 30 June 2012. Prior to moving any motion for renewal, the Act requires the Minister for Justice and Equality to lay before the Oireachtas a report on the operation of the relevant provisions. The current report covers the period from 1 June 2012, the end date of the previous report, to 31 May this year. The report was laid before the House on 17 June. It also includes, following a commitment the Minister gave, a table showing the figures for each of the years since the Act came into operation. This is helpful in showing the importance of the Act in equipping the Garda to detect and prevent terrorist actions.
It is the fervent wish of the Minister and the Government that the time will come when these provisions will no longer be required, but as Minister for Justice and Equality, on behalf of the Government, the Minister must have regard to the reality of the situation. The Garda assessment, shared by the PSNI, of the terrorist threat level in Northern Ireland is that it is severe. While the threat level in this jurisdiction may be different, it is imperative that our laws and the police are properly equipped to deal with the threat, whether in this jurisdiction or Northern Ireland. Let no one be under the illusion that these groups do not have designs on the State, as well as on Northern Ireland. This clearly demonstrates the need for the continuance of these provisions. If Senators need reminding, this need is clearly and tragically evidenced by the murder of the prison officer David Black last November. Also, in March this year, among numerous incidents north of the Border, the Police Service of Northern Ireland arrested three men following the interception of a number of mortars in a van in Derry. All three are known to be members of the new IRA. The van contained four mortars which were ready to fire.
It is not only in Northern Ireland that the campaign of terror has continued or that these terrorist groups are active. In March gardaí arrested five men and recovered a firearm at and near the scene of the fatal shooting of Peter Butterly in County Louth. In February gardaí arrested two men in Newbridge, County Kildare involved in the process of making pipe bombs. Also in February gardaí seized three mortar-rocket launcher-type tubes with associated components and arrested three men in an operation near Cahir, County Tipperary. Last September we witnessed the murder of Alan Ryan. In these circumstances the Garda must have at its disposal the appropriate measures to meet this threat. The powers available under the 1998 Act are considered paramount in maintaining effective preventive action against the terrorist groups. North-South co-operation in the area of security is vital and the Minister can give the House the assurance that it has never been better. He keeps in close contact with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Theresa Villiers, and the Northern Ireland Minister for Justice, David Ford. The Garda Commissioner maintains close and frequent contact with Chief Constable Baggott. This is mirrored by contacts between the two forces at every level.
While countering the threat posed by dissident groups is very important, it is necessary not to lose sight of the threat from international terrorism. The 1998 Act grew out of our own domestic troubles. However, its provisions form an essential element of the State's response to the threat of terrorism from any source. We cannot ignore the growth in recent years of the international terrorist threat. In co-operation with our EU partners, we must continue to counteract any threat from such sources. The 1998 Act forms part of the response to that threat also.
It is the firm view of the Garda Síochána that the Act continues to be a most important tool in its ongoing efforts in the fight against terrorism. The Garda authorities have stated the provisions of the Act are used regularly, as is evident from the report laid before the House.
Furthermore, given the considerable threat posed by some dissident groups, it is essential that the Act's provisions continue in force to support the ongoing investigation and disruption of terrorist activity.
I will now deal with the provisions of the 1998 Act which are the subject of the resolution. As mentioned, on 17 June the Minister laid before the Houses a report on the operation of the relevant sections between 1 June 2012 and 31 May this year. The report demonstrates the value of the relevant sections to the Garda Síochána and the necessity for their continued availability in tackling the terrorist threat.
Section 2 allows a court, in proceedings for membership of an unlawful organisation, to draw appropriate inferences where an accused person fails to answer or gives false or misleading answers to questions. However, a person cannot be convicted of the offence solely on the basis of such an inference. There must be other evidence which points towards a person's guilt. The section was used on 62 occasions in the period covered by the report.
Section 3 requires an accused, in proceedings for membership of an unlawful organisation, to give notification of an intention to call a person to give evidence on his or her behalf. This section was used on 19 occasions.
Section 4 provides that evidence of membership of an unlawful organisation can be inferred from certain conduct, including matters such as movements, actions, activities or associations on the part of the accused. This section was not used in the period covered by the report.
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. This section was not used in the period covered by the report.
Section 7 makes it an offence to possess articles in circumstances giving rise to a reasonable suspicion that the articles are in possession for a purpose connected with the commission, preparation or instigation of specified firearms or explosives offences. This section was used on ten occasions.
Section 8 makes it an offence to collect, record or possess information likely to be useful to members of an unlawful organisation in the commission of serious offences. This section was used on two occasions.
Section 9 makes it an offence to withhold certain information which might be of material assistance in preventing the commission of a serious offence or securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of a person for such an offence. This section was used on 40 occasions.
Section 10 extends the maximum period of detention permitted under section 30 of the Offences against the State Act from 48 to 72 hours but only on the express authorisation of a judge of the District Court following an application by a garda of at least superintendent rank. Furthermore, the person being detained is entitled to be present in court during the application and to make or to have made submissions on his or her behalf. An extension was granted in ten cases.
Section 11 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 or she 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 where the judge is satisfied on information supplied under oath by a member of the Garda Síochána that further information has come to the knowledge of the Garda Síochána about that person's suspected participation in the offence. This section was used on four occasions.
Section 12 makes it an offence for a person to instruct or train another in the making or use of firearms or explosives or to receive such training without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. This section was not used in the period covered by the report.
Section 14 is, in effect, 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. This means that persons suspected of committing these offences may be arrested under section 30 of the 1939 Act. This section was used on 52 occasions during the period covered by the report.
Section 17 builds on the provision in the Criminal Justice Act 1994 providing for the forfeiture of property. Where a person is convicted of offences relating to the possession of firearms or explosives and where there is property liable to forfeiture under the 1994 Act, the court is required 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. This section was not used during the period covered by the report.
As indicated in the report, a number of sections, namely, section 4, drawing of inferences from the statements of an accused person that he or she is a member of an unlawful organisation; section 6, directing an unlawful organisation; section 12, training persons in the making or use of firearms; and section 17, forfeiture of property, were not utilised during the reporting period in question. It should not, however, be inferred from this lack of use that these provisions are in some way redundant or unnecessary. For example, section 17 was used for the first time during the 2011-12 reporting period, despite being present since the commencement of the legislation in 1998. The existence of the provisions means that members of terrorist groups are aware that the State remains resolute in its determination to use every lawful means to defeat them.
Incidentally, far from being redundant, section 12 will, in effect, be strengthened by a provision in the forthcoming legislation to give effect to the Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism. In this regard, the Government has approved the drafting of the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) (Amendment) Bill 2012. The Bill will, when enacted, amend the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005 to create the three new offences of public provocation to commit a terrorist offence, recruitment for terrorism and training for terrorism. These offences will carry sentences of up to ten years imprisonment on conviction on indictment.
As I stated, dissident groups remain a threat to the existence of the State. They are opposed to the benefits that have flowed from the peace process and determined to undermine it. In its laws the State must retain the capacity to defeat them. On the basis of the information set out in the report and the advice of the Garda authorities, the Minister considers that the relevant provisions of the 1998 Act should remain in operation for a further 12 months, commencing on 30 June 2013. I commend the motion to the House.
Fianna Fáil supports the extension of the provisions of the Offences against the State Act 1998 as outlined by the Minister of State. It appears from her statement that these provisions have been used multiple times. They are an essential tool for the Garda Síochána and the courts in dealing with this type of crime.
As stated by the Minister of State, the Offences against the State Act 1998 was a direct response to the Omagh atrocity. The threat of terrorism from dissident Republicans remains and the spectre of global terrorism is growing. We need to ensure the Garda Síochána and the justice system have the tools they require to fight this threat. It is important on this occasion that the Seanad join the Government in sending a clear message to terrorists and those who seek to cause damage that terrorism will not tolerated. We must ensure our law enforcement and justice systems have the powers to deal with it.
That Sinn Féin voted in the Dáil today against the continuation of these measures is shocking. It is noteworthy that a tweet by the leader of the Sinn Féin Party on his opposition to the Offences against the State Act 1998 has attracted international ridicule. It is the case that middle Ireland will never accept Sinn Féin when it votes against provisions of this type, provisions which are necessary to ensure ordinary citizens can live their daily lives.
The electorate will decide that matter.
Sinn Féin is an old-fashioned party mired in the past. The threat of violence remains from former comrades - I do not include Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh - of some Sinn Féin Members. They have to be dealt with. It is about time the Sinn Féin Party came on board and supported the Government in this regard. It is an absolute disgrace, because of what the Sinn Féin Party is doing, that the Oireachtas cannot send a united message on this issue. It is important that we do so. Fianna Fáil will be supporting the Government as it believes it is necessary to do so.
I welcome the Minister of State. It is also welcome that Fianna Fáil supports the Government in the extension of these provisions. In recent years we have had an annual debate in this House on the need to retain these measures in the interests of the State. The primary duty of the Government and, in particular, the Minister for Justice and Equality, is the preservation of security and law and order on the island. These provisions form part of that agenda.
As stated by the Minister of State - I am sure Members of all parties will agree - we all hope the day will come when an extension of the order will not be necessary. However, that time has not yet come. I take on board Senator Thomas Byrne's comments on Sinn Féin. There is a need for a broader debate on the requirement for support from all political parties on the issues of peace, progress, security, law and order. It would be great if the Sinn Féin Party could support the motion, as it would send the strong signal that Ireland was truly united, not in the sense of counties, borders, colours or flags but against violence and in support of the need for dialogue and political progress.
It was worrying when the Minister outlined the thinking behind the need for reinstatement of the order and when he gave details of the facts and figures about the number of possible threats. When I say they have not gone away I am not making a cheap political point. People who sadly and wrongly and sorrily believe that there is a role on this island for violence and threats have not yet realised that there is no future in that sort of ideology. A carrot and stick approach is needed. We need to be strong on security and my party has always been strong in that regard. I welcome the support from most of the Opposition. There needs to be a strong political message going out that this Government and the Oireachtas will take and enact whatever measures are necessary to provide for security and for law and order. At another time we need to debate at greater length and with greater substance and depth the remaining political issues and blockages which have allowed certain tiny minorities of people to believe that there is still a way forward through violence. One of those figureheads of that sort of physical force republicanism, Ruairí Ó Brádaigh, died a fortnight ago. One would hope that everybody could now move on to the new plane of thinking of peace and progress.
It is quite a long time since we had a debate in this House on Northern Ireland and the politics of the island. We are hearing from some of our political colleagues across the spectrum in Northern Ireland that while we look up towards the Border and see peace where previously there was difficulty and we see political co-operation where previously there was turmoil and we think that all the problems have gone away, we must recognise that they have not. We have perhaps to be in the reaching-out mode for a little further. That comes second after the first strong message which this order sends out, that while we would wish we did not have to reinstate it, we will, for as long as is necessary, put in place whatever measures are needed to provide for the security of our citizens and our State. We want to give the Garda Síochána and our armed forces all the support they require. I fully welcome the Minister's proposals but another day we need to talk again about broadening the spectrum within which every person on this island will feel comfortable so that we finally and absolutely can put behind us the use of violence as a way forward.
We all get very excited about what sort of commemorations should be held in 2016 for the centenary of the 1916 Rising. One of the greatest monuments of all would be if we arrived at a situation where without worries about borders, counties, unity or whatever, that violence would no longer be a mechanism for political progress on this island.
I welcome the Minister of State. If I have noted the numbers correctly, I count at 189 the number of incidents in 12 months, meaning there is one every other day. I was not aware the Garda Síochána and the PSNI are confronting that level of terrorism. Like Senator Byrne, I totally support the motion. I commend the political progress that has been made in this country. On one of the days I was visiting Stormont, buses from Melvin coaches were parked outside. Lough Melvin is on the Leitrim-Fermanagh border and there were people from that area visiting Stormont to observe parliamentary democracy in operation. I had my George Mitchell moment when I sat in the Gallery to listen to the Assembly discussing education and not the constitution. John O'Dowd of Sinn Féin, the education Minister is most impressive. I commend what First Minister Robinson and Deputy First Minister McGuinness have done to promote a new Northern Ireland and it has a very strong support - overwhelming support - in all the political opinion polls. I appeal to the dissidents in this State to enter the dialogue. What has been accomplished in Northern Ireland by the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is almost a case of being as good as it gets. I do not understand why people will not lend their support and join in under the d'Hondt principle and participate in the government that is so open.
I recall a case in which the dissidents engaged in terrorism and Martin McGuinness called them terrorists. I remember the Reverend Ian Paisley said, "That's what I call them too - terrorists." I think he thought he had extended the vocabulary that he had been using for years across the sectarian divide in Northern Ireland. It is so difficult to note that people would opt out of a system of political progress which deserves the support of everyone on the island and which achieved massive support in the North-South referendum. The dissidents should examine why they are still engaging in violence and refusing to enter the political system which is open to them under the d'Hondt principle. Northern Ireland has constituencies with large numbers of seats and representation for everybody and a Parliament which is genuinely representative of all the communities there. Talk is much better than war. I do not know why they are continuing the war and I am shocked that the Garda Síochána and the PSNI have to deal with these incidents every second day. The real solution will be when we no longer need this legislation, when they participate in parliamentary democracy rather than using the gun.
I deplore the assassination on the motorway of David Black on his way to work from Coalisland to Belfast. It was an appalling incident and I also remember the Derry incident to which the Minister referred. The peace process is working. I appeal to the dissidents to get on board. Parliamentary democracy is what accomplishes everything and violence has no place in this society, North or South.
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan to the House. I also welcome the opportunity to debate the review and continuance of the relevant provisions of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998. I declare an interest as I appeared in the Special Criminal Court representing people in connection with this legislation on previous occasions. I spoke on the legislation last year and in previous years when a similar debate was held and when there was support from across the floor of the House. We all appreciate the ongoing nature of the terrorist threat and indeed the original impetus for this legislation which was the appalling atrocity in Omagh. We must always ensure a balance when debating legislation of this nature and ensure adequate protections and safeguards.
It is very helpful as a means of guiding us to have the figures from the Minister on how frequently the different provisions are used. It is clear as other speakers have said that some of these provisions have been extremely extensively used over the past year, with some provisions used as often as 62 times in one case and 40 in another case. That is a sign that the provisions are still very much in demand from the Garda Síochána and are very much used.
However, some sections are much less frequently used. When I spoke this time last year I noted that section 4 had not been used in the previous 12 months and I think I am right in saying it had not been used in the 12 months before that either. I note it has not been used again this year. Section 4 refers to guilt by association, how evidence of membership of a proscribed organisation can be inferred from certain matters. I have a misgiving about that section and I have particular misgivings when it is noted that it has not been used in the past 36 months. We need to ensure that while it remains in force for this year that if it has not been used for a further year, it should be considered whether there is any point in keeping it in the legislation. However, as the Minister of State said, I accept that section 17 had not been used for quite a number of years and was used for the first time in the 2011 to 2012 reporting period. It was used on three occasions in that period. I accept there are sections that may remain dormant for some years and then become of use but it is useful then that we would be told of cases where a section is being used for the first time and perhaps given some indication as to the reason for its use. It is important to ensure adequate safeguards are in place. I am glad the Oireachtas has a role in reviewing these provisions every year. We need to have the relevant information before us with regard to usage of the sections. It would be helpful to have a little more information on past and potential future usage if any such indication is possible.
Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. Tá an-áthas orm deis a bheith agam an scéal mar a sheasann sé le Sinn Féin a chur in iúl mar is ceart, seachas an leagan éagórach a thug an cainteoir a chuaigh romham. I welcome the Minister of State and I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate. I also welcome the opportunity to correct the misrepresentation of Sinn Féin's opposition to this motion. Our opposition is based on the human rights issues that revolve around this legislation.
I find it farcical that a Senator representing Fianna Fáil - the party that imposed on the State the greatest act of economic treason it has ever seen - has tried to castigate Sinn Féin which has played such a central role in the peace process and continued to bed down the process in the North in the past 15 years. An issue articulated by President Obama in recent days arises in this context. The Good Friday Agreement has been in place for 15 years, but some very important sections of it have not been put in place. Serious issues relating to peace in the North have to be dealt with. Of course, we all condemn acts of dissident activity and violence outside the political sphere.
The motion before the House, like the next one we will deal with, involves the apparently perpetual renewal of sections of legislation which breach a substantial human right - the right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. I do not know why Senator Thomas Byrne has an issue with what we are saying in this regard. The right to a fair trial is guaranteed under Article 38 of the Constitution and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The fundamental UN human rights instruments, to which the State has signed up, make it clear that fundamental rights protections may be derogated from in times of emergency only. How can that possibly be justified at this time? Every year we have the same debate. The report presented to us - a mere seven pages, including two appendices - is entirely inadequate as a form of scrutiny of the legislation. We have heard no real rationale for the maintenance of the legislation, other than the reference to the statistics contained in the report which are not supportive of the Government's agenda.
The report states the figures set out for the use of the various sections of the Act support the continuing need for these legislative provisions. This is plainly not the case. The use of these provisions - in fact, of nearly every section - has been on a downward trajectory in recent years. Some 443 people have been arrested, but just nine convictions have been secured as a result. To my mind, this raises questions about what people are being arrested for. If there is little concrete evidence, is it simply a case of gathering intelligence? Numerous sections were not utilised once, with some not having been used since 2003. There is less reason than ever for these provisions. There was a considerable reduction in paramilitary activity throughout Ireland last year. Ireland is safer now than it has been for quite some time. The success of the G8 summit has proved this.
The Offences against the State Act was introduced during the Second World War and has been amended numerous times since. Each amendment or enactment was introduced under the guise of an emergency. Whether it was justified then is the subject for another debate. Does the Government really believe we are living through an emergency? Does it think we are in a state of perpetual emergency? It is a damning indictment of a state that it believes the rule of law is in so feeble a condition that there is a need for permanent emergency legislation. I would like to know whether the Minister for Justice and Equality can envisage a time when the legislation will not be renewed. Do the Minister and his Government colleagues honestly have a desire to see this happen? I believe the Minister, like his predecessors, has become very attached to the idea of such draconian measures.
Sinn Féin has consistently called on the Government to repeal the Offences against the State Act in its entirety. This is an issue of human rights and civil liberties. Senator Ivana Bacik has often contributed to public discussion of the issue of civil liberties and I commend her for doing so. I agree with much of what she has said during such debates. However, she is seeking to vote for the third time for the renewal of non-jury trials, even though the evidence in support of this is growing scarcer by the year. There is enormous potential for miscarriages of justice when the usual safeguards are applied poorly, compromised or dropped entirely. The House will be aware of cases such as that of Dean Ryan, Meleady and Grogan, the DPP v. Pringle and, famously, the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four. The onus remains on the Minister and the Government to live up to their obligations under the Good Friday Agreement to deliver security normalisation. The Offences against the State Act should be scrapped as part of this process. The Government has made no move in this regard since the publication of the Hederman report. Instead, it has voted to renew this draconian legislation three times.
Sinn Féin's view is that the powers and provisions on the criminal law books are more than sufficient for the purposes suggested by the Government. I urge the House to vote against the renewal motion and instead call on the Government to properly resource the agencies involved in the fight against serious crime. Táimid ag cur i gcoinne na reachtaíochta seo ar an mbunús sin, a bhaineann le cearta sibhialta agus le cearta daonna. Tá Sinn Féin go hiomlán meáite ar an bpróiseas polaitiúil. Tá sé á bhrú chun cinn againn. Is cosúil go bhfuil na polaiteoirí sna Sé Chontae - DUP, Sinn Féin agus gach páirtí eile - bogtha ar aghaidh, ach is léir freisin go bhfuil deacracht fós ag daoine ar an taobh seo den Teorainn bogadh ar aghaidh chomh maith céanna. B'fhéidir go n-oireann sé sin an agenda polaitiúil atá acu féin.
I fully support the extension of the provisions of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998, as outlined in the motion proposed. The severe threat posed by subversives in Northern Ireland, according to the Police Service of Northern Ireland, has been outlined. It is clear from the many instances mentioned by the Minister of State that there is the same threat in this state. The Garda must be given the tools it needs to deal with it. I compliment the Garda and the Defence Forces which have defended the State since its foundation. Many members of the Garda and the Army have lost their lives while fighting the threat of subversives in the State. It is disgusting to hear Sinn Féin's mealy-mouthed excuses for its decision not to support the motion. However, I welcome the condemnation of dissidents that comes from it. I am glad that the word "condemn" has come back into its vocabulary because it was missing for quite a long time. It would be better if it supported these measures in the House. That would show it truly believes in giving the Garda and the Army the powers necessary to protect the State from attacks by subversives. I fully support the motion.
I thank Opposition Senators, including the Fianna Fáil spokesman, Senator Thomas Byrne, who have expressed stout support for the extension of the provisions of this Act. Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and the Labour Party have stood together in protecting the institutions of the State. I am glad to see we are standing together to protect the State once more.
Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit ar ais go dtí an Seanad.
The Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 was passed in the wake of the murder of 29 people by the Real IRA in Omagh on 15 August 1998. It was a necessary response to that atrocity and the loss of 29 innocent lives. That bombing and those murders represented a direct attack on the fragile peace process and the State as a major sponsor of that process. It demanded a robust response from the State and a clear statement that the views of those murderers would no longer prevail. We have had enough of their agenda of hatred, sectarianism and contempt for the will of the majority. Like the rest of us, they were given an opportunity to decide in a democratic way on the future of this island and the relationship between the two jurisdictions. However, they resorted to murder and terror, but they were never going to succeed and they have not succeeded. To this day, some of them are continuing to pursue an ideology of hatred and destruction. In 1998 the State had a responsibility to respond to the direct challenge presented by them. One such response was to provide for strong legislative powers to ensure the Garda and the courts would be in a position to meet the challenge presented. The Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 was a necessary and proportionate response. It contains a series of amendments to the Offences against the State Acts 1939 to 1985 to make them more responsive to the threat from certain groups. The Garda's assessment of the terrorist threat level in Northern Ireland is shared by the PSNI.
I ask the Senator to conclude, as I am required to call the Minister of State at 7.40 p.m.
The threat level is regarded as being severe. We all remember the tragic murder of the prison officer David Black as he travelled to his place of work last November.
I must also recall the savage killing of Detective Garda Adrian Donohoe in my own peninsula. He was a young man whom I knew, who had a young family and was assassinated in the course of his duty. Also in March gardaí arrested five men and recovered a firearm near the scene of the fatal shooting of Peter Butterly in my county.
I commend the Minister of State and she has my full support.
I thank the Members for their support, particularly Senator Byrne who spoke on behalf of Fianna Fáil, and Senator Barrett. It is clear that there is very strong support in this House as in the other House for the legislation. There remains a substantial threat from terrorist activity, particularly from dissident republican paramilitary groups which warrant the continuance in force of the Act's provisions. We need to send the message out loud and clear that these terrorists will be defeated and we will continue in our resolve to ensure that they cannot interfere with the citizens of this country. There have been several uses of the provisions of the Act. Senator Barrett added them up to 189 in total. As has also been said, there is now the opportunity for people to enter the democratic process. There is a very viable and active democratic process in Northern Ireland and here in the Republic and the opportunity to participate in parliamentary democracy is available to everybody who has a political view.
I reassure Senator Bacik and others that the Department of Justice and Equality does seriously consider the legislation in advance of renewing it and to that end the Garda Commissioner comments in particular on these provisions and on the necessity to retain them. I repeat the point that I look forward to the day, as does the Minister, when circumstances are such that the provisions are no longer needed and I assure Senator Ó Clochartaigh of that. In the circumstance where there is a threat to the institutions of the State that time has not yet arrived.
It is also clear that failure to put in place effective legislation to prevent, investigate or prosecute persons involved in the preparation or commission of terrorist offences would, correctly, leave the Government open to the criticism that it was not doing what is necessary to protect our citizens from terrorist attacks. The Government will not contemplate such a situation. It is quite clear that we do need the provisions of this Act. We have not reached a time in our history when they are no longer needed. I thank the Members of this House for their support.
Votáil.
Will the Senators claiming a division please rise?
As fewer than five Members have risen I declare the question carried. In accordance with Standing Order 61 the names of the Deputies dissenting will be recorded in the Journal of the Proceedings of the Seanad.
The Sinn Féin Members will be the subject of international ridicule as a result of voting against this motion.
