Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 23 May 1974

Vol. 272 No. 14

Law Enforcement Commission Report: - Statement by Minister for Justice.

With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I wish to make a statement.

Following the Sunningdale Conference, the Irish Government and the Government of the United Kingdom jointly set up a commission to advise them on the most effective means, from a legal point of view, of bringing to justice fugitive political offenders in Ireland. The Commission completed their work and presented their report to both Governments on 25th April. I have today laid the report before the House, and copies are available in the Library.

I should like first to place on record my gratitude and the gratitude of the House to the members of the Commission for the care, skill and speed with which they performed their complex task.

The Irish Government and the United Kingdom Government reaffirm the view expressed by all parties at Sunningdale that persons committing crimes of violence, however motivated, in any part of Ireland should be brought to trial irrespective of the part of Ireland in which they are located. Agreement has been reached by both Governments on the action to be taken on the commission's report and a statement in similar terms is also being made to the House of Commons this afternoon by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

The commission considered, but rejected, the establishment of mixed courts comprising judges from the Republic and Northern Ireland, and also as not offering a practicable immediate solution the setting up of an all Ireland Court. The commission agreed that it would be legally feasible to confer power on the courts in both parts of Ireland so that the courts in each part would be able to try certain specified crimes, wherever in Ireland they were committed. All the members recommended this as a method which could be introduced quickly. The United Kingdom members made it clear that they would have preferred the extradition solution but the members from the Republic could not advise that an agreement or legislation purporting to extradite fugitive political offenders would be valid under the Irish Constitution.

Both Governments have accepted the agreed recommendation contained in the report and, while retaining existing extradition arrangements, will introduce reciprocal legislation so that the courts in each part of Ireland will have jurisdiction to try under their own domestic law certain offences wherever committed in Ireland. It is clear from the report that all the members of the commission are confident that the extension of jurisdiction is not open to any valid objection in law.

The effect of this proposed legislation will be that in future those suspected of having committed certain specified terrorist offences in Northern Ireland but who have escaped to the Republic can be tried in the Republic, and those similarly suspected of such crimes in the Republic who have escaped to the North can be tried in Northern Ireland. The existence of this legislation should in itself deter those who commit such crimes in one part of Ireland from seeking refuge in the other part. It will remain open to both Governments to continue to seek extradition whenever they consider it appropriate as a means of dealing with fugitive offenders, and where extradition is sought but not achieved and sufficient evidence is available prosecution will be undertaken by the authorities of the part of Ireland in which the alleged offender is.

The two Governments have agreed that there will be the closest co-operation between the police forces in the investigation of offences.

The Attorney General and the British Attorney General have agreed that there will be the closest co-operation between the two Attorneys General and their staffs in conducting prosecutions based primarily or wholly on evidence obtained in the other jurisdiction and that this presents no difficulties which cannot and will not be overcome.

The two Governments have also agreed to accept the proposals in the report that special security arrangements should be made to encourage witnesses to travel into the other jurisdiction to give evidence; and to include in their respective legislation provisions to enable, in cases where witnesses are unwilling to travel, evidence to be taken on commission in the presence of the court, and of the accused if he wishes, in the way in which the commission recommended.

I am confident that the agreement I have announced today will be an important contribution towards bringing to trial those responsible for violence in Ireland. Equally important however is the prevention of these acts and the apprehension of those who are responsible. Both Governments believe that there is scope for improving Border security to deter terrorists from exploiting the Border and to increase the prospects of catching those who do, and I shall very shortly be meeting Mr. Rees, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, to discuss what can be done to improve further, the existing co-operation between the security forces on both sides of the Border.

We welcome the Minister's statement placing the report at the disposal of the Dáil and making it available in the Oireachtas Library. It is significant that the Minister chose today to publish the report and we are wondering on this side of the House whether it is a further attempt to appease the militant loyalists. We consider this to be an extremely important report. However we did not have a sufficiently long opportunity of examining it. On the examination we have had of it we have very strong reservations about the recommendations.

It has always been the Fianna Fáil view that an all-Ireland court is the only method whereby violence can effectively be controlled and civil rights defended. We believe a court of this nature should operate under a Council of Ireland and, not only would it have penal effectiveness, but it would also have civil rights jurisdiction. We agree that it was proper that the extradition method discussed in Chapter 3 of the Law Enforcement Commission Report was dismissed. This, of course, would have involved repealing our Extradition Act and abrogating our position under the European Convention of Human Rights.

It is also interesting to note that the report devotes only one paragraph to the all-Ireland court method and the fact that the all-Ireland court method is dismissed would appear to be on the ground that it would require an amendment of the Constitution of Ireland to set up such a court and also on the ground that the present proposals sought by the Government are sought urgently.

In addition to our agreement with the views expressed on the matter of the setting up of an all-Ireland court and the fact that it would require a constitutional amendment, it is suggested that the extra territorial method would not require constitutional amendment—as the Minister says in his speech, and I quote, "and is not open to any valid objection in law".

Our examination of the report indicates that not only would there be legal difficulties but it would require an amendment of the Constitution. If that is correct it would seem that the Irish side should have pressed for full consideration and implementation of the all-Ireland method. The report contains no procedure for compelling witnesses for either the prosecution or the defence to attend the trial. It contemplates evidence against the accused being taken at another venue in the absence of the accused. These suggestions violate our concept of a fair criminal trial. Moreover the report does not solve the problem of Crown privilege being pleaded by British witnesses in the Republic. It does contemplate that courts in the Republic may act on the evidence of British police and army witnesses, over whose conduct the court will have no control whatsoever.

You can see, Sir, now that our reservations are valid. Having had an opportunity of examining the report in a preliminary fashion these are some of the problems we can foresee and do foresee. As our perusal of the report becomes deeper and we get to grips with the report in depth, these fears expressed by this side of the House will become reality, as we believe they are a reality at the moment. However, as the Leader of the Opposition said a short number of days ago, the report will have to be considered more closely and scrutinised by all Members of this House. It will have to be studied closely by all Members before the Minister can introduce the legislation he proposes.

Our party will certainly require a debate on the report before any legislation is introduced in this House. Just to reiterate why we believe the extra-territorial method is impracticable and unworkable, it is because (a) an accused will not risk himself into the hands of the forces of another jurisdiction; (b) evidence therefore will have to be taken in the absence of the accused, which, I am sure, all lawyers on the seats opposite, in all probability the bulk——

When the debate for which we have called arises the Minister can then put his views on the record.

There must be no attempt to debate the matter now.

I did not interrupt the Minister for Justice and I would hope the Minister for Foreign Affairs would not now interrupt me. I know he finds it hard to restrain himself. The bulk of the evidence in all probability will not be taken by the court of trial; (c) the position of the judge of the court of trial will be invidious; (d) the proceedings will be intolerably cumbersome and time-wasting with constant adjournments to take instructions and ludicrous shuttling back and forth of judges.

These are our views and, with your permission, Sir, and through arrangements between the Whips and so forth, this side of the House will be seeking a debate on the report before the Minister for Justice on behalf of the Coalition Government introduces any legislation in relation to it.

Barr
Roinn