Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)

I have a profound sense of unease about these types of motions that have come through the Dáil on a regular basis in the past few years. If the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, cannot keep information in Garda files to himself, what hope do we have when it comes to the EU? It is important that the individual is protected. When we see the kind of leaks emanating from the Minister's office and the Garda Síochána, we should all be concerned. I know more about the journalist Frank Connolly from the Minister's leaks than from anywhere else. I know more, from Garda leaks to the newspapers, of the intimate details of the families and the cases of the Afghans in St. Patrick's Cathedral last week than from the men and boys themselves. Information can be misused and abused by those in power, whether it be the Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government, the Garda Síochána or the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

When one considers the motion, it is important for stringent safeguards to be in place to ensure only information pertaining to a well-defined group of criminal acts will be made available. There is some need for data exchange in the fight against crime and terrorism. However, the range of offences covered by this framework decision goes far beyond the relative narrow range of offences covered by other EU instruments such as the Europol Convention. I am concerned about the principle of availability and sharing data between law enforcement agencies. It is important that the principle of data protection is in place. However, is the principle of availability taking precedence over the principle of data protection? Is this a case where the cart is being put before the horse? In the times we live in, data protection may become a meaningless concept.

There are also concerns about the Hague programme. Deputy Ó Snodaigh requested a debate in the House on the programme. The Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights endorsed the call for a debate. The programme sets out strict conditions to be observed when applying the availability principle, such as the need to protect sources and information, the confidentiality of data, the need to guarantee the integrity of the data to be exchanged, the supervision of respect for data protection and appropriate control prior to and after the exchange. The draft framework decision on the other hand does not match these strict conditions. It is important these conditions are developed in the framework decision.

I am concerned with the kind of discussion we continue to have about the war on terror. Would that the world were that easy to comprehend. The fundamental injustices and poverty that exist in many parts of the world demand far more resources and contributions from western governments than the war on terror. If a small fraction of what is being spent on the war in Iraq went into improving the quality of people's lives in Africa and elsewhere, the potential for terrorism would be dramatically reduced. The fight against terrorism is increasingly being used as the justification for new initiatives but many go far beyond the purpose of sharing data. It is important to recognise that a derogation from fundamental rights that might be justified to tackle terrorism will not necessarily be justified where other criminal activity is concerned. Crime must be fought but I am concerned that the scope of this framework decision goes far beyond the types of crime and terrorism that exist.

See this speech in context