I propose to take Questions Nos. 307 to 314, inclusive, together.
I refer the Deputy to my replies to Questions Nos. 246, 247 and 249 of 1 February, and 117, 119 and 120 of 2 February.
I know of no landings on the State's territory of aircraft which have been illegally carrying prisoners transiting Ireland. Moreover, as I have made clear to the House on numerous occasions in responding to questions, the United States has given Ireland repeated, clear and explicit assurances that no prisoners have been transferred through Irish territory, nor would they be, without our permission.
I am aware of media and other reports concerning allegations that aircraft, which it is claimed may at some stage have been used in so-called extraordinary rendition operations between countries other than Ireland, might on different occasions have transited Shannon Airport. In his reply of 13 December 2005, my colleague the Minister for Transport furnished details in regard to the movements of a small number of aircraft cited in such reports. There is no authoritative basis on which to come to a view on the truth of the allegations which have been made regarding the activity of such aircraft outside our jurisdiction. Moreover, none of these reports have included any concrete evidence or specific allegations that prisoners have been transported through Irish airports or airspace as part of an extraordinary rendition operation.
In accordance with the terms of the 1944 Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, civil aircraft are not required to seek permission to land here unless they are engaged in commercial operations in this country. Under the Chicago convention, such aircraft are not required to submit details of their cargo or passenger manifests when making technical stops, for example to refuel.
State aircraft, on the other hand, are required to apply for permission before landing in Ireland. In the event that the US authorities were to request such permission for a State aircraft operating for the CIA, the Department of Foreign Affairs would require, in keeping with standard practice, an undertaking from the US Embassy that the aircraft would be unarmed; would not be carrying arms, ammunition or explosives; would not be engaged in intelligence gathering; and was not taking part in military exercises or operations. These conditions are not legal requirements but are policy stipulations which are applied at the direction of the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Other data sought would include the type and registration number of the aircraft, its call sign, the purpose of the flight, the nature of any cargo, its destination and point of departure, and estimated times of arrival and departure.
On the Deputy's question on the legal basis for the transportation of prisoners through Irish territory by a third country, Irish law permits the transit through Irish territory of a person being detained by the authorities of another State in two circumstances. Section 40(1) of the Extradition Act 1965 allows the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to permit the transit through the State of a person being conveyed from one country to another upon that person's surrender pursuant to an agreement in the nature of an extradition agreement. This is subject to any relevant extradition provisions and to such conditions, if any, that the Minister thinks proper.
The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform may also consent to the transfer of a sentenced prisoner through Irish territory pursuant to the Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons 1983, when he is satisfied that Article 16 of that convention is applicable. The convention defines a sentence as a punishment involving deprivation of liberty ordered by a court on account of a criminal offence. As stated above, any authorisations in this area would be a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
The issues raised by the Deputy's question were also fully addressed in Ireland's reply of 20 February 2006 to a questionnaire circulated by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Mr. Terry Davis, to its 46 member states. On 1 March 2006, the Secretary General identified our reply as one of only thirteen he deemed sufficiently comprehensive not to require further material. I reiterate that the Government has made its complete opposition to the practice of extraordinary rendition clear on numerous occasions.