JOINT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, EQUALITY, DEFENCE AND WOMEN'S RIGHTS díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 26 Nov 2008

Council Framework Decision: Motion.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern)

I thank the joint committee for considering this matter. While I appreciate it is at short notice, I intend to travel to the Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting tomorrow to adopt this measure. I wish to repeat the background in order that members can see it is not a particularly radical proposal.

In the wake of the terrorist attacks in the United States in September 2001, the EU took concerted action in a number of areas to combat terrorism in its various guises. One measure was the adoption in 2002 of a framework decision on combating terrorism. The framework decision set out definitions of acts which amounted to terrorist offences. In addition to requiring member states to make provision for substantive offences, it also required them to take measures to criminalise incitement to terrorism and aiding and abetting terrorist offences. Furthermore, it criminalised acts such as directing or participation in the activities of a terrorist organisation.

The framework decision was aimed at better harmonising the legal framework dealing with terrorism across the EU to improve co-operation between states in fighting international terrorism. It required member states to ensure the criminalisation of certain acts related to terrorism. They include, inter alia, certain acts causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system or other infrastructure facility, the manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, as well as research into, and development of, biological and chemical weapons.

The 2002 framework decision was transposed into Irish law by the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005. Part 2 of the 2005 Act dealt with the suppression of terrorist groups and the creation of terrorist offences. It defines those acts which amount to terrorist activity and terrorist-related activity. It criminalises both of these activities, whether they are committed inside or outside the State, and sets out the penalties for persons found guilty of such offences. The Act also defines what constitutes a terrorist group and provides that such a group will be an unlawful organisation within the meaning of the Offences against the State Acts.

The framework decision before the joint committee today builds on this 2002 framework decision by supplementing the list of terrorist-related activities which are to be outlawed. It also complements the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism, which has a similar purpose. Since 2002, matters have changed rapidly and new forms of threat have emerged, together with new methods of inciting individuals to participate in terrorist acts. In particular, the activities of international terrorist groups in seeking to radicalise or recruit individuals and to train them to participate in terrorist activities have demonstrated the necessity for additional counter-measures.

The modus operandi of terrorists and their support networks have evolved in recent years. In international terms, networks of autonomous terrorist cells increasingly make use of the Internet to communicate and to share intelligence. The Internet provides a flexible, low-cost mass communication tool that local terrorist networks and individuals can source for information on terrorist means and methods, thus functioning as a virtual training camp, and can be used for the recruitment and radicalisation of others. It also has proved to be an effective medium for movements such as aI-Qaeda to spread propaganda about their extremist activities and aspirations. In response to this, there is a focus at European level on co-operative actions and initiatives, particularly between the law enforcement authorities of the member states, to tackle the use of the Internet by terrorist groups for radicalisation and recruitment to terrorism. One such initiative, in which the Garda Síochána participates actively, is the Check the Web project. This project encourages the member states and Europol to co-operate on a task-sharing basis in monitoring and evaluating open Internet sources. The aim is to pool their expertise and resources and exchange information about specific websites or illegal content that has been identified.

The framework decision under discussion today builds on the 2002 framework decision and on the experience gained in recent years in tackling terrorism in its various forms. Accordingly it provides for the inclusion of additional terrorist-linked activities that are to be made offences, namely, provocation to commit a terrorist offence, recruitment for terrorism and training for terrorism. The offence of public provocation to commit a terrorist offence is defined as "the distribution, or otherwise making available, of a message to the public" with the "intent to incite" the commission of a terrorist offence. Recruitment for terrorism, that is, soliciting another person to commit a terrorist act, relates both to terrorist offences and to directing a terrorist group or participating in its activities.

Training for terrorism is defined as providing instruction in the making or use of explosives, firearms or other weapons or noxious or hazardous substance, or in other specific methods or techniques with the intention of committing a terrorist offence. The new offences will also be offences whether committed within the State or in another member state of the EU. The inclusion of these activities is particularly important in combating terrorist propaganda, recruitment and training activities, especially over the Internet.

I mentioned that the framework decision was inspired by the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism, which makes similar provision for offences relating to public provocation to commit terrorist offences and recruitment and training for terrorism. Ireland signed the Council of Europe convention last month. The framework decision, nevertheless, achieves more for the EU member states than would be achieved by simple ratification of the Council of Europe convention on its own. In particular, it brings into play other EU co-operation measures, such as the sharing of information, which are crucial to the EU's overall action plan on combating terrorism. It is intended to give effect in Irish law to both these instruments by means of legislation which I will bring before the Oireachtas in due course.

The Justice and Home Affairs Council now seeks the adoption of the framework decision at its meeting tomorrow. In accordance with our constitutional arrangements, Ireland maintains a parliamentary scrutiny reservation on the proposal. With the agreement of the Oireachtas, I propose to lift this reservation in order that Ireland can agree to the framework decision. Ireland has a robust body of law to combat terrorism because, unfortunately, it has long experience of the pernicious impact of terrorism on individuals and societies and of the dreadful tragedies that terrorism can cause. Ireland is committed, with our partners in Europe, to taking a strong approach to combating terrorism, whatever its origins or motivation. One should not forget that terrorism constitutes a gross violation of our core values of peace and democracy. I urge the joint committee to agree to the motion before it.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

I support the Minister in his endeavours and I agree to the motion. It is important that every effort be made by all countries in Europe to deal with the threat of terrorism. On first reading, it may appear that this is the type of motion that does not greatly concern us in this jurisdiction. However, that would be something of an understatement.

I wish to pursue two points with the Minister. I accept that terrorist activities via the Internet pose difficulties and I note the Check the Web: Fighting Terrorism on the Internet project. However, it is important that every effort be made to combat terrorist activities on the Internet with particular reference to the canvassing and soliciting of persons, the young in particular. What practical steps to address this problem could be engaged in under the motion?

Regarding terrorist activities, the Minister will accept that the INLA, a terrorist organisation, is involved in the drugs trade in this city. In the context of a transjurisdictional body of measures, could EU legislation be targeted against such organisations if its members, while active in the Dublin drugs trade, permanently reside elsewhere on the island? I agree the motion and welcome the progress made.

Deputy Dermot Ahern

I thank the Deputy for his support. This framework decision is designed to deal with the issue referred to, namely, the incitement, particularly through the Internet, of people to participate in and be recruited for terrorist activities. From a practical point of view, al-Qaeda has operated on the Internet to carry out massacres and to propagandise their aftermaths. For this reason, all countries, particularly EU member states subjected to bombings — London on 7 July and Madrid — must respond in law to atrocities. We are sovereign states, but we must co-operate, particularly the smaller countries. Through co-operation with our colleagues in the EU, we can assist one another and address issues, not least of which is the drugs issue. This is just one aspect of the response.

In the not too distant future, I will introduce legislation on obliging telecommunications and Internet provider companies to retain data so that it can be used to combat normal crime, not just international terrorism. Much of the focus at JHA meetings is on our continuing co-operation in this regard.

The issue of members of the INLA living across the Border has been a constant battle. A fortnight ago, the Garda Commissioner, Sir Hugh Orde, my counterpart, Mr. Paul Goggins, MP, and I attended a substantial conference in Enniskillen where all of the cross-Border issues, from human trafficking to paramilitary criminality, were addressed. Many efforts are being made at EU level despite the fact that our criminal justice regimes are different than those of our colleagues on the Continent. During the debate on the Lisbon treaty, we stated that we wanted to participate with them as much as possible, but any decisions taken at an EU level must also be cognisant of the similarities between our regime and that of our neighbours across the Border, with whom we are constantly co-operating.