Dr. John Reynolds:

I wish to make a final point from the perspective of an international lawyer on the importance of this Bill in upholding our obligations under international law. Obviously, the primary purpose and driver of the Bill is about intervening in a way that protects Palestinians from further dispossession and destruction, but there is also a responsibility and duty on us as a State to uphold. Clearly, enforcement of international law is not an automatic and easy, self-enforcing thing. There are an array of different intersecting obligations and ways it gets done. The role of the national Parliament is fundamental to that.

Thinking about the figures we have heard from the genocide in Gaza, we cannot think of our duty and obligations to prevent and respond to genocide in Gaza as separate from our duties in response to the illegal occupation or apartheid. One of the things the International Court of Justice says about these duties is that they will differ from state to state. The duty to prevent genocide, for example, is commensurate with the type of relations a state has with the perpetrating or offending state and its ability to influence them. When we see some of the responses from around the world over the past one or two years, it may not be a settlement goods and services ban in the way that Ireland, Chile or Norway are thinking about. In the case of Colombia, it is a coal export ban. In Malaysia’s case, it is restrictions on shipments and cargo deliveries to Israel. Every state has its role to play based on the way it can contribute. This is something tangible, concrete and practical that has been on the table and discussed at length in the Irish context. It is an essential way to enforce our obligations.