Other Questions
6. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the efforts he is making to ensure that the EU is in no way a party to supporting neo-fascist or ultra nationalist elements in Ukraine in view of alarming reports of violence and intimidation against ethnic minorities and political opponents by these elements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15395/14]
View answer8. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his views in relation to Ukraine, his views on whether a more balanced approach from the European Union is required as further moves to integrate the country with the West may lead to increased social and economic chaos for Ukrainians; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15400/14]
View answer14. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he supports placing stronger sanctions on Russia due to its actions since Crimea’s referendum vote; if he has held any meetings with the Russian ambassador to Ireland since the vote; and if he fears that violence could escalate in the region in this volatile situation. [15390/14]
View answer18. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he will provide a further update on his engagements with counterparts at European Union level in relation to the ongoing political crisis in Ukraine; and if he will indicate his position on the recent actions of Russia in the Crimea region. [15174/14]
View answerWe will discuss this issue in more depth later. I, and other Deputies, want to challenge the one-sided presentation of the very serious conflict in Ukraine. Russia is acting in its own interests and flouting international law. A referendum held at gun point is not legitimate and military incursions into another territory are not acceptable but equally, there are very dangerous elements in the Ukrainian Government, some of which are taking over the armed forces. There are alarming indications of intimidation, violence and so on against minorities and political opponents of the Ukrainian regime. The Government must view this in a more balanced way and not line up with a NATO-EU-US manipulation of a crisis in Ukraine.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6, 8, 14 and 18 together.
As we have previously stated, Russia’s violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity has given rise to the worst crisis in Europe since the end of the Cold War. Ireland has strongly condemned Russian actions from the outset of the crisis.
The referendum held in Crimea on 16 March was illegal and its results are without legal effect. Ireland and the great majority of the international community do not recognise the legitimacy of the vote which only served to exacerbate an already dangerous situation. The heavy troop presence in Crimea meant that the so-called referendum was not conducted under what could be considered remotely acceptable conditions. Furthermore, any decision relating to Ukraine's sovereignty or sovereign choices can only be taken without undue external pressure. That 100 UN member states, including Ireland, voted in favour of the UN General Assembly resolution on Ukraine’s territorial integrity on 27 March, with only eleven votes against, is testament to the grave international concern which Russia’s actions have generated. For its part, the EU has commended the measured response shown by the government in Kiev in the face of this provocation. The crisis in Ukraine has dominated the agenda of the Foreign Affairs Council, FAC, over the past few months, leading to the convening of two extraordinary sessions of the FAC and further meetings of the European Council and Heads of State and Government.
As a small country, which relies on respect for the rule of law as the fundamental guarantor of stability in the international system, Ireland has taken a strong view on what has happened in Ukraine. At its meeting on 20 and 21 March, the European Council made clear that there is no place for the use of force and coercion to change borders in Europe in the 21st century. The council also expressed the view that the Russian actions are in clear breach of the Helsinki process, which in the past 40 years has contributed to overcoming divisions in Europe and building a peaceful and united continent. As a country which had the honour to serve as the Chair in Office of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE, as recently as 2012, I do not see how we could fail to take a strong view on such matters.
In regard to the EU’s approach to Ukraine and its integration, it is worth recalling the strongly pro-European sentiments which were in evidence at the mass demonstrations which were held in Independence Square in Kiev following the then President Yanukovych’s decision on 21 November 2013 to suspend talks on the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement. While there were many factors behind the almost entirely peaceful demonstrations, such as anger with political corruption and economic hardship, the presence of the European flag was testament to the desire of a great number of ordinary Ukrainians to see their country adopt an orientation towards the West. Throughout the period when the protests were taking place, the EU had been clear on the need for a democratic solution achieved through negotiation that would meet the aspirations of the Ukrainian people.
At their earlier informal meeting on 6 March, the EU Heads of State and Government set out a three-stage roadmap to which I have referred on several occasions. The European Council adopted conclusions recalling that any further steps by the Russian Federation to destabilise the situation in Ukraine would entail far-reaching consequences. In this respect, the European Council has tasked the Commission and the member states to prepare possible targeted measures. Ireland is engaged in the continuing discussions with our partners in Brussels on this matter.
We strongly support the new interim government in Kiev which took up office on 27 February. The government’s Ministers are drawn from a range of different political groupings, including the Svoboda Party. The new government faces extraordinary challenges as a consequence of the Russian Federation’s flagrant violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The European Union has encouraged the new government to ensure that the presidential election on 25 May will be free and fair.
Meanwhile, the OSCE monitoring mission in Ukraine is already on the ground and includes an Irish staff member on temporary deployment from other field presences.
Ireland and EU member states want to see a peaceful solution to the current crisis and stand ready to support all talks to achieve this objective.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
We will work with the United Nations and the OSCE to facilitate a peaceful resolution of this dangerous situation and urge Russia to engage in serious talks including with the government in Kiev.
Again, we are getting the completely one-sided take on this. It is absolutely true that the demonstrations in Kiev were partly motivated by the corruption of the Yanukovych regime. Unquestionably, it was a corrupt and rotten regime. It is unquestionable that many Ukrainians - in certain parts of the country at least - may look towards Europe as against Russia but that is not the end of the story.
The other side of the story is that Europe knows damn well that there are significant minorities which would look to Russia and that any expansion of the European Union or NATO would be seen as a direct provocation and threat to those minorities. Do not tell me the EU-NATO strategists do not understand these things and that they are stupid or blind to them. They know damn well that it represents a provocation and that Russia has traditionally seen states and places like Crimea as buffer states against rivalry from the West.
A question, please.
That stuff is archaic but, nonetheless, Europe knew that. Crucially, now in the Kiev government, which the Minister of State said he fully supports, there are extreme right-wing and fascist elements which are dangerous. We have seen some pretty horrific examples of the sort of stuff they are doing. These people have hijacked what may be a legitimate desire for more democracy in Ukraine essentially to implement a dangerous far right and, in some cases, neo-fascist agenda but the Minister of State fully supports this gang.
I have a question for the Deputy in return. We were dealing with a government in Ukraine which said it wanted to join the European Union and on which the European Union engaged in good faith and which reflected the views of many people within the country. What would the Deputy have done in response to that? Does the Deputy really believe there is parity and equivalence between what the European Union has done and what the Russian Federation has done?
I would start by understanding that there are different cultural and linguistic groups and that there is a history of tension between those groups. Any changes to the orientation of Ukraine must take those things into account if one does not want to spark the sort of disaster we saw in the Balkans. The unilateral recognition by Germany of Slovenia and Croatia sparked the civil war in Yugoslavia with disastrous consequences which were absolutely predictable because Yugoslavia was an ethnic patchwork. Everybody knew that if one started to unilaterally recognise certain states, it would be a provocation to others and the result would be ethnic cleansing. The EU is playing with fire in a very dangerous way and giving succour to extreme right-wing elements. The Minister of State should not tell me that EU-US-NATO did not know that. What the hell is NATO doing expanding into eastern Europe when it was supposed to be a Cold War entity? This is dangerous geopolitical expansionism by the EU-US-NATO and it could have very dangerous consequences.
The Deputy may feel there is a tradition of Ministers coming into the House not answering his questions. He raised his voice and waved his pen at me. I asked him two questions. The first question I put related to the chain of events leading up to this. An elected Ukrainian Government said it wanted to develop a further, deeper and peaceful relationship with the European Union. What should the European Union have done in response to that?
It should have talked to all elements.
The EU talked to the Ukrainian Government, which was democratically elected as the Deputy well knows. The second question, which I put to him again, was whether the Deputy believes there is parity and equivalence between what the European Union has done, which has been peaceful and based on negotiation, and the actions of the Russian Federation.
I feel that the self-righteous stance taken by the US and the EU beggars belief. We listened to John Kerry tell us that this is a completely unacceptable breach of international law for which there will be costs. It was interesting to read Seamus Milne in The Guardian last week. He said:
That the states which launched the greatest act of unprovoked aggression in modern history on a trumped-up pretext – against Iraq, in an illegal war now estimated to have killed 500,000, along with the invasion of Afghanistan, bloody regime change in Libya, and the killing of thousands in drone attacks on Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, all without UN authorisation – should make such claims is beyond absurdity.
It's not just that western aggression and lawless killing is on another scale entirely from anything Russia appears to have contemplated, let alone carried out – removing any credible basis for the US and its allies to rail against Russian transgressions. But the western powers have also played a central role in creating the Ukraine crisis in the first place.
The US and European powers openly sponsored the protests to oust the corrupt but elected Viktor Yanukovych government, which were triggered by controversy over an all-or-nothing EU agreement which would have excluded economic association with Russia.
Interesting also was the leak from Victoria Nuland that they spent €5 billion investing in destabilising Ukraine for their own economic benefits.
I am very happy to come into the House to debate all the other points the Deputy made in regard to what happened in international law over the past ten years and his views and concerns in regard to that but the questions tabled relate to Ukraine. I visited parts of the Balkans in January and saw many of the difficulties still there and the current consequences of the bloodshed and pain that occurred in that region throughout the 1990s. I am well aware of the historic consequences and risk involved in the current situation but I put the same question to Deputy Wallace, which Deputy Boyd Barrett refused to answer.
I said talk to all elements.
Does Deputy Wallace believe there is equivalence between how the European Union has conducted itself in regard to this and how the Russian Federation has behaved?
I find both of them have behaved abysmally. I remind the Minister of State that when Gorbachev agreed the deal on German unification, the cornerstone of which was that a united Germany would remain in NATO, US Secretary of State Baker assured him that there would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction one inch to the east. Gorbachev repeated that any extension of the zone of NATO would be unacceptable and Baker's response was that he agreed. One reason Gorbachev has publicly backed Putin - he would not be a fan of his either - is that he has been completely betrayed. Washington believed Russian leaders would blindly do what was bidden, which Yeltsin usually did, and being drunk while he was at it.
In Chechnya, the US, Britain and Blair gave their blessing to the Russians to go in - "that's different, that's okay". Tens of thousands of people were killed in Chechnya. The Russians raped and absolutely pillaged the place and the US and the EU had no problem with it. Can the Minister of State not see that they play games with this stuff and lives get destroyed? We are taking sides now. Why are we not neutral? I have no time for how Putin or Russia behaves nor do I have time for how the US behaves. We should not take sides with either of them.
At least what we have attained, in what has been a debate here, is clarity on where the Deputy is coming from. While the Deputy has condemned what Russia has been doing, he also said that what the European Union has done recently is equivalent. The European Union is not the body which had troops in place when an illegal referendum was being held. It is not the body which has broken international law in regard to what has happened in Ukraine. I have been to Ukraine and, with respect, I feel the same way the Deputy does about the loss of life, about violence and about the misery inflicted on people. I have seen the strength of feeling in Ukraine in response to all of this.
The point I want to put to the Deputy, which he seemingly failed to recognise in any of the points he made, is that what the European Union did in its response to what has happened in Ukraine, was in response to the desire of the government in place then, which reflected the views of the country and the communities in it.
Thank you.
I will conclude on this point.
There are two more Deputies-----
On the point made in regard to the expansion of the European Union into central and eastern Europe, that expansion has been continually affirmed by the peoples in those countries in election after election.
The Minister of State is telling people what he wants.
What the Minister of State calls the goodwill of the European Union is in fact open sponsorship of the protest movements that up-ended Yanukovych, as Deputy Wallace said. Although Yanukovych was corrupt, he was certainly elected. The bottom line concerns what is now in place. I find it quite shocking that the Minister of State said he fully supports the new regime, which contains fascists and anti-Semites and which is absolutely not very healthy. The Minister of State's analysis has failed to take into account the role of the European Union. It is the case that the external struggle to dominate Ukraine has played a key part in this set of circumstances. The point we are making is that the struggle is not confined to Russian interests because the European Union and United States have displayed their interest also at the expense of the Ukrainian people. The Minister of State said he was in Ukraine. Was he in Crimea? Did he talk to the people there? It is absolutely true that the conditions of the referendum there were not healthy and also that a majority in that state support the idea of linking in with Russia. The European Union and the United States are playing a very dangerous game here.
I wish to bring a bit more modern reason to the thinking here, bearing in mind the sensitivities in the area in question. That somebody was elected does not necessarily mean he has ultimate and uncontrollable power. I can think of at least one gentleman who was elected in Europe in the past 70 or 80 years who certainly did not prove to be a democrat when it came to the test.
It was not a democratic election.
To what extent can the European Union exert a positive influence in the absence of NATO given that the latter has been seen in the past as controlling without being an aggressor?
I thank the Deputies for their questions. On what Deputy Daly said to me, we should be clear that there is absolutely no equivalence between the values of the European Union in respect of dealing with Ukraine-----
That is what they said in the First World War.
-----and what we have seen from Russia. Has the Deputy seen the European Union seek to expand its borders unilaterally and change those of another country?
Yes; Yugoslavia is an example. Germany did-----
We have seen the European Union work with countries on the basis of the wishes of their peoples. On the question of whether the European Union sought to put in place armies on the territory of another country, as happened in Crimea, the answer is "No". I welcome the debate here. It is the kind of exchange of views we should have on the floor of the Dáil. I am happy to express mine just as the Deputy is happy to express his.
With regard to what Deputy Durkan stated, the difficulties and problems that can arise with democratically elected governments are the reason for the current focus of the European Union on creating a mechanism to allow for a fair, inclusive presidential election that will put in place in May a government that respects law and the rights of minorities and that does not allow some of the behaviour to occur that I condemn and which I have condemned on other occasions. We need to have a government in place in Ukraine that respects international law and the rights of minority groups within its borders. That is why the elections to take place in May are so important and why the European Union has placed such value on making them happen again. I reject again the contention that there is an equivalence between what the European Union has done to date and what the Russian Federation has done.
7. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the diplomatic efforts that are being made by the Irish Government to protest about the mass death sentences imposed on over 500 members of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt; if he will demand that these sentences are overturned; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15394/14]
View answer12. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if his attention has been drawn to the mass sentencing to death of 529 Muslim Brotherhood members in Egypt; his views on the judicial procedures in this case and the capital punishment sentences handed out; and if he has raised any concerns with the Egyptian authorities. [15393/14]
View answer23. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his views on recent events in Egypt where 529 persons have been sentenced to death; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15399/14]
View answerThis is where the hypocrisy is exposed. Europe jumps up and down and states it is fighting for self-determination and human rights in Ukraine and that it is to impose sanctions. It claims its justification in this regard but adopts a different approach to Egypt, where 529 Muslims have been sentenced to death by mass political execution by a brutal military regime based on trumped-up political charges. Where are the sanctions or calls for urgent action in this case? Where are the emergency debates in the Dáil about this? They are not happening, such is the Government's hypocrisy.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7, 12 and 23 together.
Ireland is strongly opposed to capital punishment under all circumstances. Opposition to the death penalty is also a core principle of the European Union’s external relations policies.
The verdict of the Minya court, which issued 529 death sentences on individuals convicted of a variety of offences, including the murder of a policeman, after a two-day trial, is extremely troubling and poses very serious questions for the conduct of the rule of law in Egypt. It is impossible to see how this trial could be regarded as in any real way meeting basic requirements of due process and the right to a fair trial, with most of those accused tried in absentia and many deprived of adequate legal representation. The swiftness of this extraordinary trial contrasts very sharply to the failure to date to ensure accountability in the many instances of security force responsibility for the killing of hundreds of protestors last summer. The verdicts issued by the court in Minya have yet to be confirmed. I hope that all possible appeal procedures will be employed to review urgently these appalling sentences.
There has been widespread international criticism of the verdicts issued in Minya, including by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. On behalf of the European Union, High Representative Ashton issued a statement on 25 March expressing utmost concern and reiterating that the Union opposes capital punishment under all circumstances. The High Representative also raised this issue directly with Egyptian Foreign Minister, Nabil Fahmy, when they met earlier this week. The Minister of State, Deputy Joe Costello, who was representing Ireland at the same meeting, also had a brief meeting with him and raised our concerns. Further diplomatic measures to convey the European Union's concern and support for the High Representative's representation remain under consideration. There have been extensive discussions by EU member states in Brussels and Cairo on how to deal most effectively with the court verdict and, in particular, how best to support the appeals process in Egypt. These discussions are ongoing and will continue while the legal appeals process remains under way in Egypt. This is expected to take some further weeks, but will remain an issue of high priority for Ireland.
I am very heartened to hear clear and unequivocal condemnation of the sentences. While this is positive, why is there such a contrast between the approaches to Ukraine and Egypt? Five hundred and twenty-nine people are to be executed by the military regime in Egypt based on trumped-up charges but there is no talk of sanctions or urgent action. If the Russians decided to execute 529 people in Ukraine tomorrow, what would the Minister of State be doing or saying now? There would be emergency sessions of the United Nations, immediate sanctions, sabre rattling and probably talk of military action. I would not be in favour of military action but of an emergency response and the imposition of hard sanctions to show the proposed action is unacceptable. It is a question of not trading with Egypt, breaking off diplomatic relations with it and using every bit of power at our disposal to stop it engaging in mass political executions that are essentially to reconsolidate the dictatorship of Mubarak under a new name.
I thank the Deputy for raising this extremely worrying breach of human rights. I must emphasise two points in response to his questions. The events are exceptionally worrying and disturbing. I have already outlined the contact that has occurred at EU level and the further discussions that will take place on the matter.
I want to clarify exactly where we stand in relation to the cases that have correctly been raised by the Deputy. It is important to say clearly that the sentences have yet to be fully confirmed by the court. The Grand Mufti, who is required to issue a judgment under Islamic law, is due to decide whether to confirm this judgment towards the end of this month. No executions have taken place. The most recent execution in Egypt took place three years ago. I would have condemned it then if I had the opportunity to do so that I have now. In light of the seriousness of this situation, it is worth emphasising for the purposes of clarity that these sentences have yet to be fully confirmed under Egyptian law. The EU and Ireland are exceptionally worried about the magnitude of the sentences and the penalty, the use of which we are fundamentally opposed to.
While I appreciate the clarity of the Minister of State's response, I am conscious that the sense of urgency in this case seems to be smaller than in other cases. Some 529 people are under threat of execution.
It is a substantial number of people
Why are Government or all-party motions not being tabled on this matter? Why are we not having an emergency debate on this issue like the debate on the situation in Ukraine that will take place later today? I do not understand why we are not taking a hard line with a regime that is essentially trying to drown in blood, or repress by means of fear and intimidation, the democratic revolution of the Egyptian people. We should make no bones about the fact that this is what the regime is doing. The Egyptian embassy is still happily operating in this city. I suspect that we are doing big trade with Egypt, for example, by selling beef to that country. What does the Government intend to do if the Egyptian authorities do not immediately indicate that they intend to drop these trumped-up charges and end any talk of executing people? Given that the current regime in Egypt executed a load of members of the Muslim Brotherhood outside a mosque, it seems that this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. I am no fan of the Muslim Brotherhood, but it is clear to me in this instance that the regime is guilty and has blood all over its hands.
I would like to emphasise what has already happened, and what has yet to happen, in this regard. When High Representative Ashton met the Egyptian Foreign Minister on behalf of the EU on Monday, she made it clear that there is a high level of worry at EU level about the possible imposition on a shocking number of people of a penalty to which we are fundamentally and irrevocably opposed. I reiterate that these sentences have yet to be confirmed under Egyptian law. I hope the Deputy recognises that. The sentences could be confirmed towards the end of this month. The Deputy referred earlier to executions as if they had happened.
I did not.
I am not saying for a moment that the Deputy did so deliberately. I remind the House that these sentences have yet to be confirmed. In the meantime, Ireland and the EU will continue to emphasise our worry and make it clear that it would be unacceptable for such a penalty to be carried out.
Over 1,000 people have been killed in Egypt since a military coup overthrew Morsi's elected Government. How many people have been killed in Crimea? When it was suggested that the United States might stop sending military hardware to Egypt because it was not being used in a very nice way, that proposal was blocked by the arms manufacturers. The manufacturers in question have a vested interest in ensuring military hardware is not prevented from being sent to Egypt because they are making money out of it. I did not hear the EU say anything when that happened. Perhaps it did not have a problem with it. Over 16,000 people are in jail in Egypt now. As a matter of interest, has the Tánaiste been to the Egyptian Embassy in Dublin? Maybe the Minister of State answered that question but I did not hear him. I do not know whether the Tánaiste has made such a visit, but if he has not, why is that the case? Has the Tánaiste said anything to the Egyptian authorities about the three Al Jazeera journalists who have spent over 100 days in jail since they were charged with spreading bad news and accused of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood?
I thank the Deputy for his questions. I would like to remind him, in response to his comments about the export of arms, that a number of measures were agreed at an extraordinary meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council in August 2013. The measures in question, which relate to the violent suppression of the protests mentioned by Deputy Boyd Barrett, have since been implemented. I will explain what they involved. The EU decided to suspend military co-operation with Egypt and to deny export licences for any goods - including arms, obviously - that could be used in the violent suppression of democratic assembly, which is a fundamental human right. These EU measures are still in force. They will not be lifted until the EU's concerns have been dealt with. Reference has been made to the forthcoming elections in Egypt, which are vital if many of the difficulties in that country are to be dealt with. The EU will have a full-scale monitoring mission in place for the duration of the elections to ensure they are fair, peaceful and carried out in accordance with law. I want to emphasise again that our worries in this regard were articulated and communicated by the EU on Monday of this week.
The Minister of State has said that we are going to monitor the elections. It seems that we were okay with the military takeover. The head of the military is going to stand in those elections and will probably win. The EU will oversee that. When the majority of the people of Crimea voted to join Russia, the EU had a huge problem with that. The Minister of State mentioned that he was in the Baltic states recently. People forget that Crimea was part of Russia for over 700 years before Khrushchev foolishly decided to give it as a present to Ukraine in 1954 to buy favour there. It was a very poor political decision. Most of the people of Crimea want to be part of Russia. Similarly, the people of Egypt decided in an election to put the Muslim Brotherhood into power. I am not saying the Muslim Brotherhood are lovely fellows, but it is clear that the Egyptian people voted for them, only for them to be overthrown by the military. When Obama and Kerry were asked what was going on, and whether they intended to do anything about it, they said that the people had spoken. I do not know how anyone can defend that. While I am glad to hear that the EU has imposed some sanctions on Egypt, I would like to hear what the Minister of State has to say about the suggestion that the EU needs to reprimand the US for its continued support of an unelected military power in Egypt.
I would like to remind the House of the breadth of the measures introduced by the EU in response to some of the issues mentioned by the Deputy. They relate, for example, to the export of products that could be used for the kinds of behaviours and practices that we absolutely condemn. The Deputy drew an analogy between what is happening in Crimea and what is happening in Egypt. The key point I would make again with regard to Crimea is that international procedures and processes, which are recognised in international law-----
America abandons those processes most of the time.
-----allow people to peacefully determine their own futures, where their borders should be and how they want to engage with other countries. That did not happen in Crimea. As I have made clear at all times, the EU has condemned what has happened in this case. The Deputy asked whether further steps have been taken by Ireland. Early last month, we sponsored a cross-regional statement on the human rights situation in Egypt at the UN Human Rights Council. Our ambassador to Cairo has attended meetings and spoken with the Egyptian authorities. These issues have been discussed in full. The discussions in question took place before the court issued the verdict that has been mentioned.
That is why the meeting took place with High Representative Ashton on Monday at which we emphasised the concern over what we have here. Ireland, through its participation in the United Nations Human Rights Council has continued to highlight our concerns over some of the developments in Egypt.
Is the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade concerned about aspects of the trial of the Muslim Brotherhood members? Most of us would have concerns over the volume of the trials, the lack of fairness, reports that lawyers were not allowed in the court and that defence lawyers were not allowed to challenge witnesses. There is a litany of concern over the case. People have concerns over the Muslim Brotherhood and so on, but this is a fallacy. This smacks of the show trials in the former Soviet Union. It is not about fair play or justice. What are Government representatives saying privately to the Egyptian authorities and more importantly what will they do publicly on the matter?
Through our participation in the United Nations Human Rights Council we make clear our concerns over the human rights situation in Egypt. In the earlier answers I gave to Deputy Wallace in particular and to Deputy Boyd Barrett, I made clear the great concern we have over the use of a penalty to which we are fundamentally opposed and the process by which this stage of the judgment has been reached.
The final stage of this judgment has yet to be fully confirmed under Egyptian law and through the Egyptian processes. We believe it is due to take place by the end of this month. In the interim, we and the European Union will continue to make clear our grave level of concern regarding what has happened here. Ultimately, issues such as this do not contribute to supporting the people of Egypt to achieve a safe and secure future in the midst of having to confront major challenges along the way. That is why an issue such as this is of such concern.
Question No. 8 answered with Question with No. 6.
9. Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the extent of his recent engagements with the Northern Ireland Minister for Justice and the British Secretary of State in Northern Ireland over security and prisoner issues in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15372/14]
View answer15. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the discussions he has had recently with the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and the Northern Ireland Minister for Justice, Mr. David Ford, MLA, regarding prisoner issues and security in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15396/14]
View answer31. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the recent contact he has had with the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and the Northern Ireland Minister for Justice regarding prisoner and security issues. [15403/14]
View answerThe question relates to prisoners in Northern Ireland. Deputies Clare Daly, Éamon Ó Cuív and Maureen O'Sullivan and I have visited Maghaberry and other prisons on many occasions. We would be very wary that problems are developing. A more rational approach needs to be taken to dealing with prisoners. We are not showing any sympathy for any mad republican notions. We are just interested in prisoners' rights. We believe that a more fair-minded and rational approach would be very positive and would help move things forward in Northern Ireland.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9, 15 and 31 together.
The Tánaiste has regular comprehensive discussions with the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Ms Theresa Villiers, MP, most recently on Monday, 31 March, about the overall situation in the North and the state of the peace process. They discussed the security situation, including attacks on the PSNI, attacks and threats of attack on prison officers and other criminal acts by so-called dissident republicans as well as attacks by loyalist paramilitaries and criminals on the PSNI and communities. The Secretary of State has in her recent statements restated that the national security threat level in Northern Ireland continues to be severe. I deplore recent attacks on the Police Service of Northern Ireland officers and on prison officers which have to be seen for what they are. They are unlawful criminal acts with no moral or political justification.
The Tánaiste has raised a small number of prisoner cases which have arisen from the exercise by the Secretary of State of certain non-devolved powers regarding national security issues. Irish officials in the British-Irish intergovernmental secretariat in Belfast monitor such cases on an ongoing basis.
The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, meets regularly with the Northern Ireland Minister for Justice, Mr. David Ford, MLA, to discuss policing and criminal justice matters, as well as other matters of mutual concern. In that regard, I should note the high level of co-operation that exists on justice issues between the two jurisdictions, and in particular the excellent relationship and co-operation which exists between An Garda Síochána and the PSNI.
The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade also has regular and ongoing discussions about the situation in Northern Ireland with the Minister, Mr. Ford, MLA. Last October, he met the Minister, Mr. Ford, MLA, as part of a two-day programme in Derry and was briefed by the then PSNI district commander in Derry, Assistant Chief Constable Stephen Martin, about its policing work on the ground there. More recently, the Tánaiste attended the Alliance Party conference in Belfast on 22 March, where he met the Minister, Mr. Ford, MLA, and where he spoke of the Government’s commitment to ensuring that the devolution of policing and justice works to protect communities all over the island of Ireland from criminal elements.
The Government will continue to work with the British Government and with the elected leaders of Northern Ireland to ensure that political progress and peace continues to advance in Northern Ireland in line with the principles, values and institutions of the Good Friday Agreement.
I also deplore attacks on PSNI officers and prison officers. We should avoid giving oxygen to dissident IRA groups, which is what is happening. Treating the prisoners badly aids the more extreme elements and gives them oxygen.
Certain prisoners, including Mr. Paul Duffy and his brother, Shane, have been released only on condition that they do not live with their families or even in the same county. Where is the logic of that? If the Northern Ireland authorities want a guy to be rehabilitated into the community, do they not believe that it would be a good idea for him to be with his wife and kids? It beggars belief and I do not see the logic in it. The Minister of State should address that with the Northern Ireland authorities because it does not make any sense.
Strip searches of prisoners going into and out of court are continuing. Even though prisoners never leave the sight or hand of security officials, the authorities still insist on strip-searching them when they come back. It is only about degrading them and it has nothing to do with security. We are very keen that there be no more trouble and that the people who would like to cause trouble are not given oxygen. To see that happen we must challenge the irrational approach to some of these issues.
I fully appreciate the Deputy's objective in raising this question, which is to ensure that peace in Northern Ireland is not destabilised in any way. I certainly would not mean to infer that the Deputies' questions are motivated by anything other than that objective. I share that objective and I understand the context for it.
I make two points in response. I absolutely deplore the threats that have been made to prison officers by so-called dissident republicans, as does the Deputy.
Any negotiation or resolution of the situation in that prison can only come about when that threat is lifted. The Tánaiste discussed this matter with Secretary of State, Ms Villiers, at the start of this week.
In regard to the Deputy's other question on the operation of policy within that prison and elsewhere, as she knows, issues in regard to policing and many aspects of justice have been devolved to Northern Ireland, including to the Northern Ireland Assembly, and there are bodies in place to deal with some of the issues to which she has referred. There is the Northern Ireland Prison Service, which implements policy in that area, and also the Northern Ireland Prisoner Ombudsman, which operates independently of the prison service and which has the legal capacity to investigate fully complaints in regard to the treatment of prisoners and the alleged violation of human rights.
We have also discussed prisoner issues with Theresa Villiers and David Ford through the ad hoc group mentioned by Deputy Wallace. The point we want to emphasise is that it does not seem to us that there is sufficient awareness of the serious potential of this issue to destabilise the situation. The Minister of State is aware there was a dirty protest for a year and a half which ended on an understanding that certain improvements would be made. Tragically, the ending of that protest coincided with the appalling murder of David Black. Our information is that the situation inside that prison at the moment is very unstable because the conditions of the ending of that protest have not been seen to be met in terms of strip searching and agreements on movement on landings, where there was an understanding this would be freed up. These have not been dealt with and there is a serious problem which I believe our Government must emphasise.
The last point is the condition of prisoners on release. People like Martin Corey and Marian Price are old enough and both are quite sick. Some others were asked to wear an electronic tag, which is completely inappropriate, in my opinion. There is a list of people with whom they cannot associate. In one ridiculous scenario, Marian Price was in a supermarket and an old associate came up, and she had to say: "Get away. If I am seen talking to you, I am in breach of the conditions of my release." Our Government must stress the importance of these issues, including for human rights reasons.
In regard to the two points the Deputy makes, I have already made clear that the Tánaiste earlier this week discussed the situation of the threat that is in place in regard to officers and members of staff working in this prison. That must be lifted to ensure those prison officers have the ability to do their very difficult work safely. When that threat is lifted, it will create the environment within which other and further issues can be dealt with.
I understand the point the Deputy is making. As I said earlier, we understand the ability of issues like this to destabilise what is a difficult and fraught environment and the consequences that could have within the prison and across Northern Ireland. That is why the Tánaiste raised the general issue of the threat with the Secretary of State, Ms Villiers. However, I must emphasise that very important powers were devolved to the Northern Ireland Assembly, and for the right reasons, namely, to ensure leaders of communities in Northern Ireland have the ability to make decisions that matter to their communities. We respect that and believe it is essential to the future stability and security of the North. It is within this framework that those decisions are made.
As I said to Deputy Wallace, there is an ombudsman in place to deal with concerns people have and there is a Northern Ireland Prison Service in place to deal with what are very difficult and challenging circumstances. We are all united, as noted on the earlier question put to me by Deputy Smith, in our desire to see the Haass negotiations reach a strong and successful conclusion and ensure the kind of threats we are referring to are lifted, and that members of the PSNI and the Northern Ireland Prison Service, as Deputy Daly herself has said, are not subject to the kind of appalling murder and threats they have been subject to in the past.
