Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I move:

That the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade –- noting that the Russian lawyer, Mr. Sergei Magnitsky, died on 16 November 2009 at the age of 37, after being systematically denied medical care and beaten by riot guards with rubber batons in a Russian pre-trial detention centre, after he uncovered and exposed a major corruption scandal in Russia; and
- noting the passage in December 2012 of the U.S. Magnitsky Law, the European Parliament Report into establishing common visa restrictions for Russian officials involved in the Mr. Sergei Magnitsky case, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly resolution and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Written Declaration, all calling for visa sanctions for the perpetrators of this crime;
- calls on the Government to impose an Irish Magnitsky Law which would:

- publicly list the names,
- deny visas into Ireland, and
- freeze any assets found in Ireland,

of Russian government officials and others who -

- were responsible for the false arrest, torture and death of Mr. Sergei Magnitsky,
- perpetrated or financially benefited from the crimes that Mr. Sergei Magnitsky uncovered and exposed, and-or
- participated in the cover up of those responsible for those crimes;

- calls for the Irish Magnitsky law to be imposed against all other gross human rights violators;
- calls on the Government to use its Presidency of the Council of the European Union to impose EU-wide visa sanctions as called for by the European Parliament.

The motion follows a consensus that I detect among many members at the last meeting we held where we met with Mr. Browder and heard the circumstances surrounding the death of Sergei Magnitsky. Those of us who were on the OSCE parliamentary assembly would have heard it previously. People who were here who were also on the Council of Europe would obviously have heard the background to it. The first draft was circulated to everybody and some suggestions were made to improve it, which I was happy to do.

The first paragraph of the motion sets out the circumstances that brought about the death of Sergei Magnitsky involving the denial of medical care and the fact that he was moved from one prison to a more secure but less humane one, about which we heard the last day. The second paragraph deals with the statement of facts with regard to the various bodies that have taken up the case. The third paragraph deals with our call to the Government to look at introducing a Magnitsky law which would cover the component parts that cropped up in the previous discussion we had and which also was very much part of the US Magnitsky law and involves publicly listing the names, denying relevant parties visas into Ireland and freezing assets found in Ireland. If the Government is of the mind to go with this issue, it might be done by virtue of a Magnitsky amendment to the Criminal Assets Bureau legislation. It would seem to fit that area to some extent.

It also addresses the assets and finances of Russian government officials and others responsible for the arrest and torture of Mr. Magnitsky, and the cover-up that took place subsequently. A call for an Irish Magnitsky law to be imposed against all other gross human rights violations in Russia was in the first draft but Deputy Byrne made the wise suggestion that this be made a template for dealing with any significant human rights violation which the Government or authorities might be of a mind to pursue so that these people cannot enjoy in other jurisdictions the proceeds of their criminal activities in other jurisdictions. With the ease of travel and the ease of transferring money today, we are all well aware of the need for co-operation around that. The motion also calls for the Government to utilise its Presidency of the Council of the EU to seek to extend this circumstance and the legislation surrounding it to other European countries.

We saw at our last meeting that a number of parliaments across Europe have passed motions calling on Governments to act. We were also informed that there are discussions with the EU Commission with a view to doing something in Europe, perhaps along the lines of what was done in the United States of America. There was a reaction to what was done in the USA to cut off the ability of citizens of that country to adopt children from Russia. It has led in Russia itself to public protests in certain cities where it is felt that it is against the interests of children in Russian orphanages who may not have a very bright future. They are being deprived of the opportunity to be adopted by people who would provide them with better care and life opportunities.

I am happy to move the motion but if it is felt it should be adjourned for further consideration, I am happy with that too. I would like to see consensus on this significant human rights violation. I have DVDs on the case which would make most of us recoil. It is only one case and there are others in Russia and other countries. If we are adjourning the matter for further consideration, I ask that we not put it on the long finger. If we are meeting the Russian ambassador, we should do so sooner rather than later and prior to the next meeting at which we determine the motion. I also ask that if there is an intention to amend the motion, it would not be diluted to the extent that it becomes meaningless. If we are making a statement, it should be clear and unequivocal. If we regard this as a serious human rights violation, appropriate sanctions should be applied otherwise there is no deterrent.