Charles Flanagan (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy. Before I revert to Dr. Murphy, there are a number of points or questions that I would also like to put to her. I acknowledge her frank engagement with us as a committee. We can follow up as early as Thursday on this. As she will be aware, Ireland fully supports the sanctions against the perpetrators of the coup and the economic entities that currently sustain the regime. We are, of course, conscious of the fact that EU sanctions and measures that predate the current coup were in place and were supported by Ireland.

It is important that we continue to strongly support the measures and perhaps a further expansion.

In this regard I was very struck by what Dr. Murphy said about the possible engagement with international tech companies, many of which are operating in Ireland. Obviously, communications from areas such as Myanmar and other areas which from time to time experience unlawful coups are vital. It is not a new adage that the truth is the first casualty of war. We need to ensure an adequate flow of information. The committee will investigate that further to see what can be done from an Irish perspective in respect of our engagement with the tech companies.

Dr. Murphy said that the response from ASEAN to the political situation fell short of calling for the release of political prisoners. I ask her to expand on the reasoning for that. In the past few weeks, I would have thought there was a possibility of suspending Myanmar from ASEAN. However, Dr. Murphy did not include that in her recommendations, nor did the European Union, which has referred to further engagement of ASEAN. What are the likely next steps in the engagement with ASEAN, given that she does not support suspension of Myanmar's membership?

Dr. Murphy responded to Deputy Stanton on the arms embargo, which is crucial notwithstanding the resources that are currently available to the directors of the coup. She specifically mentioned Russia. I would add India and China and ask her to respond to that.

Dr. Murphy recommended the engagement of Irish and international parliamentarians with politicians in Myanmar. However, the ambassador with a remit for Ireland would be the Myanmar ambassador to the UK, who, of course, was recalled some weeks ago. I note the Irish Government did not receive any notice of the recall and was not in any way informed. Therefore, we do not have any direct engagement through ambassadorial channels.

Dr. Murphy has experience of engaging directly with politicians there. Would it be fair to say that she has direct knowledge of the work practices and political philosophy of some of the current CRPH members? Would she recommend international democratic regimes contacting them? In that regard I ask her to comment on the national mandate of these CRPH members? What is their remit nationally across Myanmar? Is it a broadly based political organisation? As a consequence of that, what international recognition has there been of the CRPH?

When Dr. Murphy says that there might be further direct engagement, perhaps even towards the civil society, what is her view of there being civil society leadership? There have been calls internationally for the generals to speak directly to civil society. Does she believe that would be a meaningful engagement? What is the strength of the civil society leadership? This is something that will provide us with further engagement. I ask her to respond to Deputy Clarke and me on these issues.