Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:10 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Justice whether he has any proposals to amend the law on extradition.
Ceisteanna-Questions. Oral Answers. - Extradition Law.
The Government have approved the preparation of legislation which will include provision for the amendment of the Extradition (European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism) Act, 1987 in the light of the Supreme Court judgments of 15 November 1991 in the Magee, McKee and Sloan cases and for certain other matters.
Details of the legislation will be published in the ordinary way when it has been finalised and approved by the Government.
We are delighted to hear that there is legislation under way at long last. Can the Minister tell us when we can expect to see the legislation to which he refers? Secondly, will he accept that no nation in Europe has suffered more from terrorists in terms of loss of human life and damage to the economy than we have here? Thirdly, will he accept that no nation in Europe has a greater interest in dealing effectively with terrorists than we here in Ireland? Lastly, will he accept that no person charged with offences of violence against the person or offences relating to firearms or explosives should be entitled to hide behind the political offence exemption in the Extradition Act as currently constituted?
The Deputy can be assured that the preparation of the legislation is proceeding as a matter of urgency. I can assure the House that the Government's wish is that the Bill will be introduced as soon as possible. It will include the provision of the amendment of the 1987 Act in the light of the Supreme Court judgment in the names of the three persons I have mentioned. The Government have decided that the provisions of that Act should be amended to achieve greater clarity in relation to the circumstances in which offences are excluded from the political offence exemption. We will be proceeding with that matter and hopefully it can be increased in the not too distant future.
Let me put it to the Minister——
Could the Minister reply to Question No. 4?
I have called Deputy McCartan.
Let me put it to the Minister——
This is my question. Deputy McCartan has been in and out of questions since I came here.
I will continue to be in and out of questions.
It is the prerogative of the Chair to call members of this House.
I accept that but I am entitled to put down a question and get a reply and to press my question.
I assure the Deputy he will be called again and he ought not to feel aggrieved in the matter.
Let me make it clear that I am not satisfied with your ruling or the Minister's replies.
Let me challenge the Minister on this suggestion that the Government are dealing with this item as a matter of urgency. Will he confirm that what he has told the House today in terms of Government proposals is no more than what was included in the Programme for Government published in late 1989 which indicated that the very measure he is now talking about so many years later was then described as an interim measure to be introduced by Government pending substantial review of the extradition laws generally? Would he agree that the Government are not giving anything like the priority this issue deserves, that there are far greater issues to be determined and improved in our law with regard to extradition that the Government are delaying long in dealing with?
The Government have acted wisely in these matters. We have lived up to our obligations under the European Convention. We have always done that. What we are saying here is that there is need for an amendment——
You said that in 1989.
I said there is need for that amendment to produce greater clarity in relation to the circumstances in which offences are excluded from the political offence exemption. We would also at this time have to amend the law to extend the circumstances in which Irish citizens may be tried here for offences committed abroad. There are some elements like that that have to be considered. It is very important legislation and it is being processed and progressed. We do live up to our obligations and the Deputy has accepted that in the past in so far as international conventions on this matter of terrorism are concerned. I agree with the Deputy that we must deal with it effectively.
Will the Minister accept that there is no point in trying to close the stable door after the horse has bolted and that there is a need for political will to confront this problem? Does the Minister accept that there is now an urgent need to ensure that no person charged with offences of violence against the person or offences relating to firearms or explosives should be entitled to hide behind the political offence exemption? That is the core issue and I would like a direct response from the Minister.
That is the clarity that I mentioned to you.
Does the Minister accept the point I am making and will the amending legislation cover that?
The clarity will be in relation to the use of automatic weapons in so far as it has fallen out from those cases which I mentioned. That is the clarity we are talking about.
That is not a full response.
When the Government are considering this matter of amending, renewing or expanding our extradition laws, I would ask the Minister to keep two things in mind. First, the citizens of this State must be assured of a fair trial or have a reasonable assurance that they will get a fair trial wherever they are being extradited to. Second, until the laws in the UK and the Six Counties have been changed and their attitudes have been shown to be different from what they are, nobody should send their dog there, never mind one of our citizens, no matter what the situation. We can prosecute them here and look after them ourselves.
I take cognisance of what the Deputy says in that matter.
There are 3,000 people dead over the last 50 years.
That is from someone who has a very constricted view of what should be happening. At the very least, will the Minister have the decency to uphold——
Deputy Shatter may not hurl abuse across the floor in a sitting position.
Let me ask the Minister a question in a non-abusive way. Would the Minister not agree that, at the very least, in response to Deputy Blaney's question, the Minister should have expressed support for the principle of extradition in the context of the appalling crimes of violence that happen on this island?
Why do you not come up and find out yourself instead of sitting there shooting your mouth off?
That goes without saying, because that is the law of the land. Extradition agreements do operate satisfactorily and there are special arrangements for extradition between this jurisdiction and the neighbouring jurisdiction——
Which are not watertight.
In discussions with senior politicians in the UK jurisdiction — and I have ongoing discussions in this regard — these matters do arise and extradition arrangements are in place. What we are talking about here is clarifying a weakness in one of those systems.
And they are hugely important.
They are important and they are functioning. The Criminal Jurisdiction Act applies in so far as it operates here as well. I do not know what the problem is.
(Interruptions.)
We will judge the Minister's bona fides at a later stage.
Order, please.
Can the Minister tell us how many warrants have been issued to extradite people to the North of Ireland?
That is a specific question, Deputy, and is worthy of a separate question.
With respect, it is also relevant.
The Deputy is asking a particular question.
Last week eight bombs went off on mainland Britain, some in toilets in public houses. The cowardly perpetrators of this type of crime should not be given a hiding place in any civilised society. For too long we have provided a bolt-hole for criminals from the North of Ireland.
I am sorry, but I do not have the information sought by the Deputy. It is not included in my brief.
Can we proceed to Question No. 11 in the name of Deputy Bruton?
Would the Minister hazard a guess?
I have not got that number.
The Chair has called Question No. 11 and it ought to be responded to.
The arrangements are in place, Deputy McGahon.