Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind members of the committee and people in the Visitors' Gallery to turn off their mobile telephones for the duration of the meeting as they cause interference, even in silent mode, with the recording equipment in the committee room.

The first item on the agenda is very important, a discussion with Amnesty International Ireland about its recommendations to the Irish Presidency of the Council of the European Union. I am delighted Colm O'Gorman, executive director of Amnesty International Ireland, is able to attend this afternoon. He is accompanied by Ms Iverna McGowan, policy and strategy co-ordinator for Amnesty International Ireland European institutions office. You are welcome to the meeting. All members of the committee have received a copy of Amnesty International's recommendations to the Irish Presidency. I commend the organisation on producing a very focused, considered and clear document. The recommendations are realistic and are underpinned by a clear understanding of the broader institutional relationships that exist within the Irish Presidency and the way it operates. The focus of this committee is on those areas of the document which concern the EU's external relationships and how the Presidency can co-operate with the European External Action Service and use its diplomatic service and membership of other multinational organisations, such as the UN Human Rights Council, to protect and promote human rights. Some of the committee members travelled to Geneva last December to have some discussions about Ireland's membership of the UN Human Rights Council. We met the ambassador and many of the people involved in human rights.

When the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade met the committee last month to discuss the priorities for the Presidency he gave a commitment that the Government would work to ensure the EU upholds its commitment to peace, democracy and human rights. He said these values were central to Ireland's foreign policy and would be central to the Irish Presidency as well. I believe Amnesty International Ireland's contribution is a constructive input that helps put a shape onto that commitment. The witnesses are very welcome.

Before I invite the witnesses to make the presentation I wish to advise them that by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they are to give this committee.

If the witnesses are directed by the committee to cease making remarks on a particular matter and continue to do so, they will be entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their remarks. They are directed that only comments and evidence connected to the subject matter of this meeting are to be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against a member of either House of the Oireachtas, a person outside the Houses or an official, by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I now ask Mr. O'Gorman to address the committee on Amnesty International Ireland's priorities for the EU Presidency.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

Thank you, Chairman, and our thanks to the committee for inviting us to speak on the topic of the Irish Presidency's role on EU human rights foreign policy. As members will be aware, we met the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Gilmore, at the launch of these recommendations in January. The Tánaiste welcomed our recommendations and noted the Presidency's firm commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights in Ireland, Europe and globally. I am happy to say we have had a lot of engagement with officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, both here in Dublin and at the Irish Permanent Representation to the EU in Brussels, which has been very welcome.

I understand that earlier this year the committee met Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis, the EU Special Representative for Human Rights. Our colleagues in Brussels, one of whom is with us today, Ms Iverna McGowan, are maintaining close contact with Mr. Lambrinidis and look forward to working with him to continually strengthen the EU's external human rights policies. Indeed, he shares our view that there is a pressing need for greater coherence between the EU's internal and external human rights policies and we will comment further on this later.

As parliamentarians, committee members will also be aware that the Treaty of Lisbon has increased the role that national parliamentarians play in EU decision-making processes. Indeed, only last month I met Deputy Dominic Hannigan, Chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs, to discuss, among other issues, the Irish Presidency's role in chairing the Conference of Parliamentary Committees for Union Affairs of Parliaments of the European Union. Together with the European Parliament, national parliaments play a vital role in overseeing and scrutinising EU policy.

Today, we want to address Amnesty International's recommendations to the Irish Presidency on the external affairs dimension of the EU. We are aware that the Presidency alone cannot deliver on all of these recommendations but rather will have to work together with the European Commission, the European Parliament and the External Action Service, EEAS. Nevertheless, the Presidency plays a key role in the Council of the EU, in particular with regard to providing leadership on key human rights dossiers. As a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council and EU member state, Ireland has committed itself to upholding the highest standards in protecting and promoting human rights. We often hear that human rights are the cornerstone of Irish foreign policy and Ireland cannot limit work on human rights to international fora such as the United Nations or the OSCE, vital as that is, but must also assert the primacy of human rights within its own region. Indeed, since the entry into force of the Lisbon treaty and the establishment of the EEAS, EU human rights foreign policy has increasing relevance.

I will now ask Ms Iverna McGowan to give the committee an overview of some of our recommendations and we will then take questions.

Ms Iverna McGowan:

I will begin with the implementation of the EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy, copies of which have been circulated to members. This framework and action plan was adopted last June and was a significant achievement, marking a new point of departure for the EU's foreign relations. If this new human rights package is to succeed and meet its full potential, what is needed now is a heavily reinforced emphasis on implementation by all actors. The Irish Presidency should work in co-operation with the EEAS to ensure that the deadlines set out in the EU human rights package are met and actions are put into practice. In our recommendations, we have outlined some practical examples of how this might be done and will continue our engagement with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade on this in the coming months.

Awareness and implementation of the EU guidelines on promoting compliance with international humanitarian law remains remarkably low in comparison with other EU guidelines. One of the problems in the past has been a lack of clarity over responsibility for their implementation, as this responsibility has been shared between different actors, under the primary oversight of the EU Council Working Group on Public International Law. As chair of this working group, the Irish Presidency has a particular role in collaboration with the EEAS to ensure further progress in the implementation of the guidelines. We are conscious that much of Ireland's work on this is below the radar. For instance, we understand that agreement was reached recently in the working group that during all EU dialogues and discussions with third countries, ratification of additional protocols to the Geneva Convention will be raised.

Current and future enlargement negotiations should be engaged with constructively, maximising the potential to improve the human rights situation in the countries concerned. This should also include work on freedom of expression and LGBTI and minority rights in Turkey, for example. In the Balkans, the EU accession process has been an essential tool for addressing impunity for war crimes, both at the international level through co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and at national level through building up domestic judicial systems. In Croatia, while there has been progress domestically in recent years, further attention will need to be paid, post-accession, to ensuring that victims and their families are given access to truth, justice and reparation for human rights violations committed during the 1991 to 1995 war. Addressing ongoing impunity will also need to be prioritised with Serbia and other countries in the region as they start accession talks.

Mr. O'Gorman mentioned that we would elaborate further on the issue of internal-external coherence and in that context the Presidency must ensure greater coherence between internal and external human rights policy. We can no longer ignore the increase in racism and xenophobia in the EU's population and among senior political leaders. To take the example of Greece, migrants and ethnic minorities are hunted in the streets. Furthermore, 12 million Roma across the EU suffer pervasive and systemic discrimination. Amnesty International believes that it is critical to the EU's credibility that its support for women's rights internationally is matched by serious efforts to combat violence against women in EU countries. An important first step for the EU would be to sign and ratify the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence.

At the launch of the Presidency recommendations, we asked that the Presidency would assist the EEAS to deliver on human rights priorities at the UN and to work to promote more effective burden sharing between EU countries. A few months into the Presidency, we note and welcome the role that Ireland is playing with regard to EU burden sharing at the UN Human Rights Council. The Presidency has particular responsibility for helping to deliver on a strong and effective arms trade treaty, with human rights protection at its heart, at the final UN Conference in March 2013. We commend Ireland's supportive position and action on the arms trade treaty discussions to date and the open engagement with Amnesty International by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

The Presidency could also play a leading role regarding an agreement on UN treaty body strengthening, which can enhance the ability of rights holders to enjoy their human rights. In terms of supporting the UN human rights mechanisms, Ireland could lead by example and set a firm timetable for ratifying the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, signed in 2007. Ireland could also lay out a clear process towards ratifying the optional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and urge other states to sign and ratify it.

As committee members will recall, Ireland played a key role in the drafting of the EU human rights defenders guidelines during its 2004 Presidency. It is now important that Ireland follows up on this, shows leadership and ensures an EU focus on implementing those guidelines. In particular, there is a need to be proactive in ensuring systematic feedback to human rights defenders. This would involve giving support to human rights defenders under threat and consistently consulting with the individuals concerned regarding the level of visibility to be given to their particular case through prompt, vocal and visible reaction to restrictions to freedoms of expression, association and assembly, though démarches, press releases and public statements, including via the EU High Representative on Foreign Policy. Feedback should also be systematically provided to human rights defendants and their families on actions taken on their behalf.

On the recent revision of the EU guidelines on torture, we ask the Irish Presidency to show leadership to ensure that the EU focuses on implementing the guidelines on the ground to effectively eradicate torture and ill-treatment in all parts of the world. If the guidelines are to be effective on the ground, we need to make sure that EU staff abroad, EU delegations and member state embassies, including those responsible for drawing up country human rights strategy, have a deep understanding of the torture guidelines and their practical application.

On the topic of corporate accountability, under the human rights package EU countries have committed themselves to developing national plans for implementing the UN guiding principles on business and human rights. We have specific recommendations in this area and I invite members to refer to our document in that regard.

On preventing and combating violence against women, as the holder of the EU Presidency, Ireland must deliver on its pledge to the United Nations, before its election to the Human Rights Council, to play a role in efforts to combat all forms of discrimination and to promote gender equality. We have already mentioned the importance of signing and ratifying the Council of Europe's Istanbul convention in this regard.

Ireland needs to ensure a strong position on violence against women in line with international standards and the EU's external policy at the UN Commission on the Status of Women next week. Ireland should also fully support EU action to combat female genital mutilation both in EU and third countries.

In the Presidency recommendations members will find a list of nine cases of people under threat. People around the world are suffering the consequences of having their human rights violated. The adoption of the EU guidelines on human rights defenders is one of the key outcomes of the Irish Presidency in 2004. As Ireland is a member of the UN Human Rights Council and is hosting the EU Presidency, Amnesty International asks that we ensure active engagement on these cases by raising the plight of the people concerned at every opportunity and pressing for tangible progress; working with all EU embassies and delegations in other countries to achieve positive change for those concerned; acting locally and in national capitals under all human rights guidelines; and ensuring that action is taken not only on the cases listed outside the EU but also on the cases mentioned which occur in the European Union.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms McGowan and Mr. O'Gorman for outlining those proposals. I invite members to ask questions rather than make a Second Stage speeches and we will start with Deputy Brendan Smith.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I compliment Ms Iverna McGowan and Mr. Colm O'Gorman on their work in Ireland and abroad. In his opening statement Mr. O'Gorman states: "Indeed, since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and the establishment of the EEAS, EU human rights foreign policy has increasing relevance." It is not often we hear compliments paid to the work of the External Action Service. Will he elaborate on that?

With regard to the human rights defenders guidelines which were finalised during the previous Irish Presidency, my impression from the opening statement is that they are not being implemented. Am I correct in that? Ms McGowan mentioned the nine people whose lives are under threat and whose human rights are being violated. In the political calendar six months goes by very quickly. From the experience of Amnesty International, is it better to focus on specific cases that are necessarily high profile and have a wider dimension than just the individual rather than having a laudable and worthwhile programme of advancing issues in general? Is it the case that if one tries to make progress on too many issues in a very short period, one can end up with little progress in any of them? Would it be better to focus on the needs of some of the nine individuals whose human rights are being violated?

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Mr. O'Gorman wish to take that question?

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

The eternal challenge for Amnesty International is to make a call on the issues to raise from the broad-ranging agenda. Human rights is such a broad area of work that trying to focus our agenda to ensure we have maximum possible impact is an enormous challenge. Nowhere is that more obvious than in the work we do on the cases of individuals who are experiencing human rights violations.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand that Amnesty has an international dimension to its work and obviously it cannot isolate all worthy cases and causes. We host the Presidency for a short period, would we as a country do better to concentrate on a lower number of very laudable and necessary objectives?

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

From our perspectives, we want the Irish Presidency to engage with the recommendations we have made. We would like to see progress throughout the Presidency and beyond this Presidency on these issues. These are Amnesty International's priorities for the EU Presidency.

This is part of a continuum of work for us. We are already working on our recommendations for the coming Presidency. We have started the preparatory work and there will be a hand-over moment. I absolutely understand what Deputy Smith means by asking that question and I have no doubt that following meetings we have had with Ministers - for example, this morning we met the Minister for Justice and Equality and we previously discussed these issues when we met the Tánaiste - that Ireland has its own priorities. It is choosing what it can progress. What we want to try to ensure is that there is continuous progression on these issues throughout and beyond all the Presidencies. I understand how challenging that can be.

I will ask Ms McGowan to respond to the specific questions on the External Action Service.

Ms Iverna McGowan:

I will respond to questions on the External Action Service and the increasing relevance of EU human rights and foreign policies. I mentioned during my opening statement that we passed around the human rights action plan that was adopted last June. For the first time there is a comprehensive action plan which mainstreams human rights across different policy areas, for example, with the Commission's work on trade. In third country dialogue there is no longer an excuse to limit it to trade, as the action plan mainstreams human rights across all of those areas. That is what I meant by referring to its increasing relevance. There is a tool to ensure its increasing relevance but we are faced with the task of implementing it. That is the reason we have come up with the strategy in which members states have been assigned specific tasks. We have spoken to the Irish officials involved to try to take it forward.

Let me respond to the question on the human rights guidelines of 2004 not being implemented. We have established from conversations with different member states that a general issues in regard to the guidelines is that there was too much discussion on the language of the guidelines and not enough focus on their implementation. We have been working in Brussels to ensure the guidelines are revised not only for the sake of revising them but in consultation with EU delegations and diplomats working on the ground to share best practice. It has been found that in some places the guidelines are being implemented in a better way.

Although I am Irish, I am based in Brussels and have been working on the Cypriot Presidency, the Danish Presidency and the Lithuanian Presidency. These nine cases would be taken forward. I accept that six months is a short time to deal with these cases but we also co-ordinate work with our offices across Europe. These cases are not only being brought to the attention of the Presidency but also have a broader remit.

The European Parliament has committed that when delegations go to third countries, they would in their dealing with that third country specifically raise Amnesty International Presidency cases, irrespective of which country they go to. Although it is specifically in the Presidency documents, these nine cases are part of a broader strategy on the individuals involved.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

I completely understand the point Deputy Smith makes about the need for the Irish Presidency to focus on certain issues. We suggest if there is an opportunity for Ireland to advance progress in any of the areas or in any of the cases we have suggested, we urge parliamentarians in Ireland to progress those individual cases as best they can.

Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The witnesses talk in terms of showing leadership to ensure the EU focuses on implementing the Amnesty International policies on human rights defenders. Part of the difficulty is that the EU has a favourable status with many of the regimes around the world in which torture and human rights abuses are going on. What do the witnesses suggest the Irish Presidency do about this? The area that springs to my mind is the Middle East and relations between Palestine and Israel on illegal settlements. Do the witnesses have a view on the banning of settlement goods?

Also raised in the document provided is the issue of the disappearance of people, and there is a reference to the protection of all persons from enforced disappearances. A recent document on rendition raised the issue of people who disappeared and supposedly went through Irish airports. The Tánaiste made the point that this information added nothing new.

Three individuals subject to rendition have stated they transited through Shannon Airport. What additional measures could the Government take to address this issue? If flights organised by the CIA or other organisations are passing through Irish airports, should gardaí board the aircraft in question and carry out inspections? Apart from implementing the convention, what else can the Government do?

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

I will deal with the specific question on renditions. To clarify, the three cases to which Deputy Crowe refers were revealed through research by Amnesty International. We do not suggest that the three individuals in question were transited directly through Shannon Airport, rather that the airport was used as a staging post, stop-off or refuelling point as part of the rendition circuit. This, in itself, would be contrary to international law and Ireland would be in breach of its obligations in allowing its airspace and territory to be used in this manner.

Information provided in some of the diplomatic cables revealed by WikiLeaks demonstrated that the former Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, was familiar with this research and the relevant facts. If the cables are to be believed, the then Minister had discussions with the deputy ambassador at the United States embassy in which he effectively sought cover should this information ever be revealed.

There are, undoubtedly, grave issues which the European Union needs to tackle regarding breaches of international law as a result of extraordinary rendition on EU territory. Ireland is involved in this entire issue and significant questions should be asked. We must first establish facts. It will not come as a mind-blowing revelation when I state Amnesty International would like a full and proper investigation of extraordinary rendition across the European Union. Ireland should certainly establish such a process. For years, we have been asking successive Irish Governments to identify the gaps in current law that allowed such violations to take place. On inspections, the first thing we need to do is establish what took place and whether it was contrary to existing national legislation or legal provision. If that is shown to be the case, we need to address that simple fact because it would clearly be in breach of our international obligations.

Those are the some of the steps we need to take. The European Parliament has spoken on this issue on a number of occasions. Perhaps Ms McGowan will elaborate.

Ms Iverna McGowan:

This again relates to the point about internal-external coherence. I encourage members to read a European Parliament report published in 2012, on which Amnesty International did intensive work. Known as the Flautre report, it examines European complicity in US-led rendition and secret detention programmes. The report is due for revision in September. We speak of the rule of law and human rights abroad but we are calling for this issue to be addressed. We must reject impunity and support full, independent and effective investigations of all allegations of European complicity in the US-led detention programme, as outlined in the European Parliament report. I refer to page 9 of our recommendations. One of the individuals at risk was also involved in this system. In terms of what the Presidency could do at European Union level, when the time comes to revise the report, it would be useful to examine what actions were recommended by the European Parliament.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

One must also remember that we are not only discussing the process known as rendition but also secret prisons operating on European Union territory. This entire issue requires a proper and full investigation as none has taken place thus far.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Two of the questions I proposed to raise have been addressed. On Palestine, the issue of children must also be included. I attended a briefing yesterday on the plight of children in Palestine, the disproportionate risk they face and the Euro-Mediterranean agreement.

I salute Amnesty International and note the extremely important work it has been doing, particularly since this committee was renamed the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade. I would have liked human rights to have been included in the title. The pressure exerted by organisations such as Amnesty International is terribly important because one of the points to emerge from yesterday's meeting was that attention to human rights in Palestine and other places around the world has been blown off the agenda by the economic difficulties being experienced in many European countries.

The difficulty for people such as me - perhaps the witnesses will have some advice for me in this regard - is that the Euro-Mediterranean agreement, for example, includes a human rights protocol that has never been monitored or assessed. There is internationally recognised documented evidence of gross human rights abuse by the Israeli authorities and army against the people of Palestine, yet the human rights protocol has not been assessed or monitored. Does Mr. O'Gorman agree that this brings the whole concept of human rights into disrepute diplomatically? A protocol is stuck into an agreement which then allows people to believe all is wonderful and everyone's human rights have been sorted out, only to find that human rights violations are taking place right under one's nose. What can the committee do about this? I and some of my colleagues have tabled resolutions time and again but they disappear into thin air.

Rendition flights were known about five or six years ago and information about them was placed on record by those observing flight traffic at Shannon Airport and a number of Members of the Oireachtas. One of the strengths of our action on this matter was its all-party nature. The then Leader of the Seanad, Ms Mary O'Rourke, accepted the position and a committee was established to inquire into the matter at my suggestion. This committee was sabotaged, however, as a result of pressure from councillors in Shannon who saw an economic angle to the issue. We tracked and put on record evidence of an unbroken cycle of rendition, providing information on flight paths and so forth. What does one do in such circumstances? I wrote to the Council of Europe committee headed by Mr. Dick Marty warning it of what our Minister for Foreign Affairs would say and advising it not to believe him. The Minister had full knowledge of the matter but was concealing that fact.

With regard to the general issue of human rights, it has been suggested that one useful function of the Irish Human Rights Commission, formerly headed by Maurice Manning, was that it should proof all Government legislation for its human rights impact. Perhaps Amnesty International could play a role in proofing some of the European directives and so forth for human rights, particularly those related to matters such as policing and asylum. What is the delegation's view on that matter? Given our extremely poor record on asylum issues, perhaps a proofing of these issues for human rights abuses, even domestically, would be useful. Such abuses have been enshrined in our legislation in the past and may very well happen again because this Government is showing precisely the same traits as the previous Government. I am not sure whether we are ruled by Fine Fáil or Fianna Gael.

On the individuals who are under threat, given that few other organisations take up the issue of threats to gay citizens, I ask the witnesses to elaborate on this issue. There is a specific case in Cameroon but gay people are under threat all over Africa in the most horrendous way. Despite this, we are doing trade with these countries and giving them financial support for civil society and so forth. These cases are horrifying and as a church-going member of the Church of Ireland, I find it shocking that all the Christian churches seem to support this kind of ignorant brutality.

I seek some advice. Reference was made to a number of protocols to which Ireland and the European Union should sign up and fully recognise. I ask Amnesty International to provide all Members of both Houses with a document, setting out in bullet points all the conventions or protocols that we have not signed or to which we have not adhered. There are so many of these agreements that we make assumptions.

There are stages, such as, signing, ratification and then there is something else. It is like one's First Holy Communions and one's this, that and the others. If the witnesses could give us a list of those things I am sure all colleagues, across the different parties, would be prepared to push for them, particularly at this time. If that is possible, as an information aid, I would certainly welcome that and, perhaps, my colleagues would as well.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before Mr. O'Gorman answers that question, I wish to inform him that Amnesty International is inviting an LGBT activist from Uganda in April and we will have a formal meeting, in conjunction with Amnesty International, with her.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman. I wish to inform the Chairman that I attended the gay lesbian awards in the very swanky Westin Hotel, and this woman was awarded, by the Irish groups, a particular prize mentioned. It is welcome that she will be invited here.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will have that meeting here in April.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Splendid.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

In regard to how the EU in its negotiations in relation to trade with other countries might advance. It is a little like the ascension process. There is a strong focus on human rights standards within countries which are negotiating membership of the EU. Yet, once they become members very little attention is paid to human rights within those states or their compliance with not just EU standards but international standards. The same could be said about the negotiation of strong human rights components to trade agreements. There is little follow-up and little monitoring and evaluation. That well-used phrase that we recognise in Ireland, implementation deficit disorder, is not a condition that is unique to Ireland and is an issue we need to address.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a wonderful phrase. It is the first time I have heard it.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

It is not mine. It is well used at this stage.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Senator Norris can claim it.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

I think it was Eddie Molloy who used it in the first instance. It is vital if we are to invest time, money, energy, resources and political capital in the development of human rights strategies and bodies of law in the development of agreements that have human rights standards built into them, that we monitor, evaluate and ensure those agreements have values. That is very important. It is also worth acknowledging that in successful economies - I am not comfortable as a member of human rights organisation making an economic argument for human rights - there is a principled foundation of principle argument for human rights that needs to be made first and foremost. The reality is that societies that have respect for human rights and equality are generally more successful economies. One might argue that if the full framework of human rights law was applied in many parts of the world where is significant conflict, it might go some way towards alleviating elements of that conflict. In that regard, there are times when it is important that we remind the world generally, as well as Members as legislators, and governments and states. When we talk about international human rights law, this is not a body of law which, as human rights activists, we wrote but a body of law that was written and developed by states. In that context all we are saying is that they should respect this law. This is not our law. This is a law developed and voluntarily adopted and agreed by states. In regard to the signature-ratification process, there are other stages to the process in the Irish context. As we are a dual estate we can sign up to an international law and can then ratify that law. However, it only becomes binding in national law when it is legislated for at national level. We have a fine tradition here of signing and over a long period, perhaps, eventually ratifying, but not necessarily bringing those laws into force at national level. This is an issue to which the committee may wish to pay particular attention.

In regard to the role of LGBTI people, I am grateful to the Chairman for giving Kasha Jacqueline an opportunity to meet the committee. That is important given what is happening in Uganda where, as Members will be aware, an anti-homosexuality law will come into force that can, in certain circumstances, lead to the death penalty being provided for people convicted of aggravated homosexuality - whatever that means. I am at a loss to understand that concept.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand it-----

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

It also bans the promotion of homosexuality. That has something in common with a number of EU states. There are a number of states within the EU where laws are being advanced to ban or limit what is called the promotion which, effectively, is any public expression of identity by LGBTI people. In the Irish context, the last two letters of the acronym, transgender and intersex individuals, Ireland has a poor record in respecting their rights, an issue we hope to see addressed in the future. On the question of intersex rights, there has been very little focus on such rights here. We are back to that place again about a need for a strong commitment to human rights principles, principles on law developed and written by states. We want states to be bound by and to respect the law they wrote and at European Union level a coherent approach to human rights as a foreign affairs issue. That requires action. It requires more than words, or law, even though law matters and we are arguing for advances and developments in law. It also requires monitoring, engagement and real political commitment to the principles that are enshrined in law.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A small delegation from the committee will probably travel to Uganda later in the year. Obviously that issue will be raised in our meeting with parliamentarians, ministers and government officials.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

If appropriate, I urge the delegation to try to meet LGBTI human rights defenders while there. That level of visibility, if it is safe and possible for it to do so, would be very important.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will do that and will speak to the witness on that issue before we go.

Michael Mullins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am interested in the cover of the documentation which shows a demonstration in Dublin on the property tax and other taxes. I am curious as to why Amnesty International would show such a demonstration on its cover given that the taxes and charges were approved by Government and are part of Government policy. As I would have expected Amnesty International to be neutral on the political front, I would be interested to hear its response. In regard to the Roma community and the level of discrimination, Amnesty International asked Ireland to take a clear stand on discrimination and to support fellow member states in the fight against racism and to challenge peers to address discriminatory rhetoric by public officials or advocacy of hatred which constitutes incitement to hostility, discrimination and violence. Is there much evidence of public officials in member states advocating discrimination, hatred and incitement?

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Only last week.

Michael Mullins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It would not be premeditated.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Can we leave the internal Seanad out of the debate at the moment.

Michael Mullins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is one question I wished to raise. In regard to the nine cases the witness highlighted, I presume these are carried over from a previous presidency. Has significant progress been made on any of those cases in the six months prior to the Irish Presidency and is it expected that progress will be made during our Presidency on any of these cases?

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

The choice of photographs was to signify freedom of expression and no more than that. I am afraid the Senator is reading too much into it. It signifies that in Ireland we are lucky enough to live within a democracy where public protest is permissible and, I hope, encouraged and where peoples' freedom of expression and assembly is guaranteed regardless of whatever political view they may hold.

I would love to have engaged conversations with parliamentarians and legislators in this country about how we provide for essential rights such as economic, social and cultural rights. Human rights organisation comment on human rights issues which are inherently and essentially political in many ways and increasingly, economic, social and cultural rights are too but that is perhaps a discussion for another day.

On the question of the Roma and the levels of discrimination experienced by them, I can forward research to the Senator by e-mail which cites, sadly, numerous examples of extraordinarily inflammatory statements made by public officials across the EU. The treatment of Roma people is an enormous blight on the EU and its human rights record. The levels of discrimination that Roma people experience is quite extraordinary. Amnesty International will send some of that information on to the Senator. I do not wish to draw too many parallels with Ireland's experience of working to try to address discrimination and marginalisation of members of the Traveller community because there are some significant differences. The Traveller community is very much an indigenous, ethnic group within Ireland, in our view. We recognise the difference in terms of what some Roma people face in some countries to which they are relatively recent migrants. When I say relatively recent, I mean within the last century. Ireland, perhaps, has some positive experience that it could share about how we have tried to use an anti-discrimination approach, through legislation, policy formation, funding, resource allocation and so forth, to try to address that particular issue here. We could also, perhaps, take a look ourselves and see what we can learn in terms of improving that approach. We have positive things to offer to countries which are a bit more averse to looking at the issue of Roma discrimination directly. One of the things we would really like to see the Presidency do is to pick up and advance the anti-discrimination directive which has been effectively moribund for the last few years. Our understanding is that the Irish Presidency is trying to move that forward and we think it is something it should definitely do. It would go a long way towards addressing discrimination generally, but particularly for the Roma population.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank both witnesses for their appearance today. I have read their submission which effectively asks this committee to support the recommendations from Amnesty International Ireland for the Irish EU Presidency. Having read them all, I find there is no recommendation with which I disagree. However, I need some illumination on some issues.

I will start with human rights defenders. This committee has met members of an organisation called Human Rights Defenders, who I believe were based in Dún Laoghaire.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

The organisation is called Front Line Defenders.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Excuse me, Front Line Defenders. I am mixing Front Line Defenders with Human Rights Defenders.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

They are front line human rights defenders and work specifically-----

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is what makes it complicated. I was in the Mansion House when that organisation was nominating a series of activists. In fact, some governments protested - I think it was the Israeli, Moroccan and Iranian governments - vigorously at the inclusion of some human rights defenders.

The witnesses are representing Amnesty International. There is another international body that deals with front line defenders, giving them aid when they are threatened and so forth. Is there duplication there in any sense? We also have the OSCE, the Council of Europe and others, including this committee, addressing the issue of human rights. A lot of resources were available to publicise human rights defenders within Ireland, through newspaper articles and advertisements in The Irish Times, on bus shelters and indeed, through enormous banners hanging buildings. Is there duplication here? Do the organisations adopt the same people? For example, Amnesty International lists nine cases of people under threat. Are those same people already supported by Front Line Defenders?

My next question relates to the question of borders and Amnesty International has some interesting recommendations in that regard. Specific reference is made to Frontex in the submission. We know that there is great movement of people through countries like Greece and through Morocco to Spain. There is great movement of people throughout the world and I understand that Frontex is an agency charged with defending national borders or boundaries. I ask the witnesses to outline whether they are happy with the performance of Frontex. The submission refers to rescuing people in distress at sea and their prompt and safe disembarkment. We know there are lots of people coming to Europe from northern Africa by boat. Is Amnesty International happy that Frontex acts as an independent, impartial agency and upholds human rights standards?

My final question relates to the reference to "Dublin Regulation's operation" in the context of asylum seekers and refugees. Are these international regulations or ones which apply specifically to Ireland? The submission reads, "The Presidency must ensure that solidarity measures within the EU are also geared to seeking to address systemic deficiencies in asylum systems and addressing the imbalances in the Dublin Regulation' s operation". Are these regulations that are applicable solely in Ireland?

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The guidelines were drawn up in Dublin.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask Mr. O'Gorman to respond to those questions.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

I will try to be swift. On the question of duplication, Front Line Defenders is a really extraordinary organisation. Its founder and director, Ms Mary Lawlor is a predecessor of mine in Amnesty International and I hold her in very high regard indeed. She established Front Line Defenders because she believed that there was a need to provide very practical supports to human rights defenders. Front Line Defenders does really invaluable work in providing respite, resources, funding, technical support and so forth to human rights defenders so that they can continue on with their work. Its focus is quite different to that of Amnesty International. Clearly, both organisations campaign to try to protect individual human rights defenders, not least because they deserve that protection but also because if we can improve the situation in any one given case, that can have a broader positive impact for people living and working in that region, or country, as human rights defenders. I do not believe there is a duplication, as such. There is a huge amount of co-operation between the two organisations but we undertake somewhat different work.

On the question of the Dublin guidelines, as Senator Norris correctly pointed out, Dublin refers to the fact that this agreement was struck in our capital city. That is perhaps unfortunate, given its provisions and their implications for many people.

Frontex is the EU border control agency. It is not a human rights entity or agency.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My question refers to how it controls the borders.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

Its a border control agency and we would like to see much greater clarity on its human rights obligations but its focus, sadly, is on controlling borders.

Ms Iverna McGowan:

The focus of Frontex is border control but our main concern is that border control cannot happen in a vacuum, in terms of international refugee law and human rights standards. I am aware that in January there was an announcement at EU level about border management with Libya. We are slightly concerned that the announcement did not have enough emphasis on human rights. This is linked, once again, to the point about internal and external coherence. There cannot be statements at EU level that refer to a full commitment to human rights in Syria but then, on the other hand, when it comes to dealing with people fleeing from that country, the EU clamps down the borders. There must be a human rights focal point there. As Colm rightly said, Frontex is concerned with border management but there must be a human rights concerns there too. We have noticed that other agencies at EU level dealing specifically with refugees and migrants within the EU are not being as well resourced as Frontex, which is a concern of ours. We are also concerned about the independence of the human rights advice given to Frontex. We understand that there is now a human rights advisory system in Frontex but we would question its independence. We would argue that human rights should not just be a consideration but should be central to any decisions or actions taken by Frontex with regard to migrants.

The point raised about lives at sea is connected with externalisation. We had an international human rights camp in Lampedusa in the south of Italy last summer, where we documented and raised awareness about the thousands of lives that are lost at sea.

We are speaking about the obligation of the EU and its member states to proactively respond to distress calls and ensure lives are not lost at sea.

Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have been very struck by the discussion given the comments made recently by a certain councillor about the Traveller community. We do not have to go too far for this type of comment. A huge spectrum of issues has been covered and I will confine myself to a small number of them. Amnesty International works with EU embassies and delegations. The committee meets many ambassadors and I certainly have followed up on cases with individual ambassadors. Is there a role for the committee to raise specific human rights issues when we meet ambassadors? We have a good relationship with the ambassadors from Iran and Kenya. The African ambassadors meet us collectively. We do not have an ambassador from the United States just yet but I presume we will have one. The United States has major questions to answer when it comes to human rights. They are very good at telling other people what to do but they lack in doing it themselves.

I wish to wear my Association of European Parliamentarians for Africa, AWEPA, hat and speak about the human rights of workers. Recently we had an interesting discussion with the Dublin Port Authority which has initiated a programme with ports in certain African countries, particularly in west and east Africa. It involves a training programme with workers in these ports and AWEPA hopes to follow up on it. A recent meeting with a gentleman from Kenya brought home the absolute ruthlessness and unscrupulousness of multinational companies when it comes to land. It is a real David and Goliath issue. They offer an abysmal amount of money for the use of land, the use of which the population is then deprived of, and this has repercussions for food. Fortunately in this particular area the Kenyan community stood together with an NGO and was able to do something about it. I do not think enough is being done with businesses with regard to human rights. Some NGOs work very hard on country-by-country auditing, so something can be done about the massive amounts of tax evasion and tax avoidance.

We have much to answer for when it comes to how we treat migrants. Regardless of how one feels about them being here, the fact is they are here and they are entitled to be treated with dignity. I have friends who work with unaccompanied minors on great integration programmes with schools in the inner city. They work on a pittance and I was appalled recently when I learned of the amount spent on direct provision. Some people are making a great deal of money out of the needs of other people. We must look practically at what can be done. Where is Amnesty International on this?

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome Mr. Colm O'Gorman and Ms Iverna McGowan. I wish to follow up Deputy Crowe's point on the Palestinian refugee camps. Recently I and several colleagues visited Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon. I must say we found the conditions appalling. We did not expect it to be wonderful, but we were shocked by what we saw. People received only one meal a day and between 12 and 16 people were sleeping on the ground in one room in sub-zero temperatures, which reach -5°C in some instances. What really appalled us was that these camps have existed since 1948. One of my colleagues made the point that we have a plethora of international organisations, NGOs and states dealing with human rights. The agenda is broadening all the time. Have we lost focus? Here is a fundamental breach of human rights, which has existed since 1948, which has not advanced one iota in the interim.

I agree fully with my colleague, Senator Norris, on the persecution of gay and lesbian people in certain parts of the world, particularly in the areas mentioned in Africa. This is to be decried and the Chairman's initiative is good. Under the EU action plan, as big an issue which probably involves even greater numbers, is freedom of religion and belief. Tremendous persecution of Christians in particular, but also of other denominations, takes place in various parts of the world. In the Middle East and parts of Africa, Christians are persecuted. We see what has happened in Nigeria and the number of Christians killed in Boko Haram when they went to church and were bombed. I read about freedom of religion in many reports but I hear very little advocacy from NGOs or governments with regard to condemnation and seeking specific actions to be taken in this regard.

I commend the comments made on the arms trade treaty and I hope at the end of March to attend the UN debate on it. What is Amnesty International actively doing, particularly in countries which oppose it, such as the US, to ensure it is adopted and put into effect? Many of the human rights breaches we see in various parts of the world are as a consequence of some of the major international states selling arms to both sides in conflict areas, which impacts on civilian communities in a disastrous way.

Freedom of expression online and offline is an important issue and needs to be promoted. I do not use social media, but people bring to my attention certain aspects of it. There is much abuse and personalised commentary, some of it defamatory. We have seen only one case being taken. Some of the comment is general but some is very specific and personalised. This needs to be addressed and tackled. The abuse of any freedom becomes an impediment to that freedom being universally recognised. Unless it is tackled, we will provide excuses for people and countries not to embrace the medium as part of our democratic structures.

Amnesty International is very familiar with the case of Sergei Magnitsky and I know it has taken a position on it. Should we use the opportunity of our EU Presidency to create greater awareness of this case throughout the EU? Tremendous human rights breaches occur in Russia and if this case could in some way be used effectively and constructively, it could be a catalyst to prevent such cases in the future.

I presume Amnesty International subscribes fully to the enjoyment of human rights by persons with disabilities. I was recently contacted by a lady in England whose first child suffers from Down's syndrome. As a result of the situation in Britain she finds it almost impossible to get the resources and access the support systems which are essential for the child's development. The reason for this is that identification of Down's syndrome leads to abortion in 90% of cases. What is Amnesty International's position on this? Does it regard this as a breach of human rights?

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Many questions have been asked.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

Certainly and I will try to get through them. Deputy O'Sullivan asked about meeting particular ambassadors, and we encourage all members of the committee to raise individual human rights cases when they meet ambassadors of particular countries. We are available and happy to provide any information we can which may assist them and they should please feel free to contact us in this regard.

With regard to corporate accountability, the practices of multinationals and the exploitation of land, we have done a huge amount of work on the clean-up of the Niger Delta with a target for Shell. There is also what happened in Bhopal in India and other major multinationals have been responsible through their business activity for grave violations of human rights. We seek a system of law which holds multinationals to account for the human rights abuses for which they are responsible, wherever they might occur. At EU level this is particularly what we are speaking about.

We have asked the Presidency to open discussions on the need to improve access to an effective remedy for victims of corporate human rights abuse, identifying existing obstacles and the steps that could be taken towards removing them. Such steps should include the facilitation of access to state-based judicial and non-judicial remedies.

The issue of immunity takes me on in some ways to Senator Walsh's comments on Russia. There is nothing like immunity to allow human rights violations to continue unchecked. They become graver and more gratuitous the longer such immunity continues. The EU must do everything it can to address immunity for human rights violations in the conduct of multinationals or external European states.

The ongoing scandal - I use that word advisedly - of the length of time that families spend in direct provision in Ireland is the result of the failure of successive Governments to introduce an effective asylum process. People are perfectly entitled to come to Ireland to seek asylum. They are then entitled to expect a process to be put in place by the State that addresses their claims for asylum in a timely and effective manner and to be treated with dignity and respect while within the State seeking asylum. It is fair to say that the State is falling short in that regard. That families are languishing in direct asylum is a major issue. Children spending their childhoods in direct provision is unacceptable and I agree that something must be done to address this situation as quickly as possible.

Freedom of religion and belief is a core human right and is an area in which we are active, including at EU level. Our work on tackling Islamaphobia and anti-Semitism speaks for itself. Senator Walsh should feel free to contact us regarding the human rights violations experienced by people of the Christian faith in other parts of the world. We would be happy to share our information on individual cases and the work we are doing thereon.

We have lobbied long and hard in Ireland to ensure that Ireland ratifies the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, a groundbreaking international treaty that will cause a massive shift in how we as society deal with the question of disability. It is a profoundly important legal instrument. Ireland has signed it, but we hope that it will be ratified as quickly as possible.

The issue of abusive and personalised commentary in social media was raised. I am familiar with the concept, as I am active in social media. Thankfully, some of us are more equipped to deal with such comments when we see them. It is a matter for national legislators to address. Our concern as regards Internet freedom is that people should, as an extension of their right to freedom of expression, be able to access the kinds of technology that allow them to communicate effectively. For us as a human rights organisation, this in many ways is an issue of freedom of expression and assembly.

I believe that I have covered most of the points.

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I asked a specific question on the breach of that woman's child's right.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

I noted some of the responses to the Senator's comments when he raised the issue. Indeed, I anticipated that he would raise it before the end of the conversation, albeit perhaps not quite in that way.

As a human rights organisation, we work within the framework of international human rights law. Our positions on sexual and reproductive rights are grounded in the provisions of that law. We work to oppose selective abortion and enforced abortion, for example, in China. We have a strong track record in that regard.

If Senator Walsh as a legislator believes that this is an area of human rights law that needs to be strengthened or amended in some ways, he is in a position to advocate for that. We are bound to work within the framework of international human rights.

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the selective-----

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

There is no provision within international human rights law to the effect that abortion is, in itself, a human rights violation. In fact, many provisions make it clear that denying a woman in certain circumstances access to abortion is a grave human rights violation.

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Mr. O'Gorman agree that selecting a child for abortion on the basis of that child having a disability is wrong?

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am anxious to move on.

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am just asking for Amnesty International's position. I accept that Mr. O'Gorman does not want to answer the question.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am anxious to move on from the issue, as we have another-----

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is an important human rights issue.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. Does Mr. O'Gorman wish to answer? He is not required to.

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I accept that he is not required to answer.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not want to put anyone on the spot.

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

Amnesty International opposes the selection of any person for abortion.

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is what I thought. I accept that.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

This is certainly the case as regards gender selection.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did Mr. O'Gorman wish to add something further? I asked a question as well.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

Senator Mullins asked a question about the nine cases. There was an update on the situation. When I stated that we would carry on with the nine cases, I meant that we would work on them for however long it might take. We have not been working on all of them throughout the last few Presidencies. Some of them have been introduced in this Presidency in particular, as they are more recent. There have been some developments.

Ms Iverna McGowan:

We are pushed for time, but I would be interested in sharing the European Parliament's resolution as regards the Irish Presidency. It might give the committee some ideas as to how it could engage with the nine cases in a practical sense.

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

There has been a development in the case of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender, LGBT, human rights defender from Cameroon. He has been released from prison and is in hiding in that country. By no means is his situation secure. We will keep the committee updated on the cases.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If our guests write to the committee's clerk, their information on the nine cases will be distributed.

I will follow up on our meetings with the ambassadors. The committee meets them on a weekly basis. Last Friday, we met the Pakistani ambassador regarding the issue of US drones being used in Pakistan. Yesterday, the secretary general of Morocco's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Co-operation met the committee to update us on Moroccan issues. Amnesty International was represented at the court case of the 24 people tried for the murder of 11 policemen. It raised some concerns about the trial. Is there an update on that matter?

Mr. Colm O'Gorman:

I do not have the information on me. If there is an update, I will find the information and send it to the committee.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On behalf of the committee, I thank Mr. O'Gorman and Ms McGowan for having a useful and interesting discussion with us. It has been a good meeting. We will keep in touch with our guests and inform the Tánaiste of their objectives for the Presidency.

As to Ireland's membership of the UN Human Rights Council, a small delegation travelled to Geneva last December. We will not officially start until next March, but officials will appear before the committee from time to time to update us on Ireland's achievements during its three-year membership of the council. We will probably hold a follow-up meeting on the matter in the next couple of years. Human rights are a key priority for the committee and we will keep the matter to the forefront in 2013.

Again, I thank our guests for attending. We look forward to working with them closely.