Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Tuesday, 8 July 2025
Select Committee on Justice, Home Affairs and Migration
Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) (Amendment) Bill 2025: Committee Stage
2:00 am
Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
To be clear to the committee, as the Minister has touched on with regard to the purposes of the amendments, amendments Nos. 1 to 7, inclusive, in my name, are essentially a foundation for later amendments to define the circumstances of when it would be an offence to join, train or recruit for an armed force that is engaged in crimes against humanity, war crimes or genocide. Amendment No. 2 provides a definition for organising or facilitating travel for the purpose of serving with such a force. Amendment No. 3 provides a definition for providing training in the armed forces of a state engaged in war crimes. Amendment No. 4 provides the definition of receiving training in the armed forces of a state engaged in war crimes. Amendment No. 5 is a definition for the recruitment for the purpose of recruiting into armed forces of a state engaged in war crimes.
Amendment No. 6 is a definition of travel for the purpose of serving in the armed forces of a state engaged in war crimes. Amendment No. 7 furthers that definition. Amendment No. 10 is a substantive amendment to outlaw training for the purpose of serving in the armed forces of a state engaged in war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Amendment No. 11 is the provision to outlaw recruitment for the purpose of serving in such armed forces. Amendment No. 12 is the provision to outlaw serving in the armed forces of a state engaged in war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide. Amendment No. 13 is the substantive amendment to outlaw organising or facilitating travel for the purpose of serving in the armed forces of a state engaged in war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.
It is important we are very clear that none of those things are illegal in Ireland. If they were, any member of the IDF who set foot in this country would be arrested under such provisions, and those provisions do not exist. The difficulty with the legislative frameworks the Minister has outlined is that the law, as it stands, does not prevent or make it illegal to be engaged with an armed force engaged in the things I have described. The provision is quite cleverly worded from a particular viewpoint, because what it excludes is armed forces and state actors, insofar as those activities are governed by the rules of international law. Israel will state its actions are governed by the rules of international law, and that is why it is before the ICC and the ICJ. It makes the argument that what it is doing does not constitute war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide. Despite what we can see, we depend on rulings from the ICJ and the ICC, and we know that in such instances, these things take an awfully long time. At the moment, a person can actively recruit for the IDF or organise travel for members of the IDF. An Irish citizen can leave Ireland and train with the IDF, return to Ireland, shrug their shoulders and experience no consequences whatsoever. The purpose of these amendments is to ensure that we are very clear that terrorism is terrorism, regardless of whether it is carried out by a non-state actor or a state actor. We need to be entirely clear.
I agree with Deputy Kelly that if the Minister were to give any inference whatsoever that he was open to find a different formula of words, that would be acceptable. However, the amendments that we have put forward very clearly set out the definitions and I do not think anybody would dispute any of the definitions we have submitted.
Amendments Nos. 1 to 7, inclusive, are clear and precise along with the specific rules in amendments Nos. 10 to 13, inclusive, as they have been defined. In his follow-up, will the Minister indicate how many individuals have actually been charged with offences under the International Criminal Court Act 2006 he cited a number of times, in order that we might have a compare and contrast scenario? Will he give a sense as to the jurisdictions of origin of those who have been charged in this State under the 2006 Act? We want to avoid the charge that has been rightfully levelled against states all over the Western world of hypocrisy and duplicity. We need to ensure this is in place.
The EU directive counts for nothing when it comes to the IDF. There are EU states financing and arming Israel as it conducts the most horrendous acts an established state actor has committed in decades, and it has done so with the support of EU states, to their shame. Ireland has always been strong in comparison with our EU neighbours in rhetoric, but we have yet to actually take meaningful steps to ensure we can say with hand on heart we have no hand, act nor part in what is being done, particularly to the Palestinian people.
No comments