Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)

I note the Defence (Amendment) Bill 2011 seeks to expand the candidature for appointment to two posts, military judge and director of military prosecutions, to individuals who are not members of the Defence Forces and to increase the potential pool of qualified personnel who can be appointed. It also provides that a Circuit Court judge can perform the functions of the military judge where the military judge is not available. The Bill must be looked at in the light of recent changes in military justice and the modernisation of the Defences Forces is central to this.

The military court system is provided for in Bunreacht na hÉireann and a radical overhaul came about in 2007, which revised disciplinary provisions of previous Acts and implemented a new system of military justice. I find the terms "military justice" quite strange because justice is justice. Why is there a need to call it military justice? Does this or could this give rise to doctors' justice, teachers' justice or bus drivers' justice? Why the need for military justice separate from our justice system? The Library and Research Service looked at the European Convention on Human Rights which states that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by the law. Why is there a need for a separate judicial system for members of the Defences Forces? This appears to come down to a recognition that military justice is different due to the unique position of the military and the greater demands placed on soldiers, which are more than demanded of any other category of person in the State. Now we are told there is a need to protect the structure and discipline that is vital in the military and that there are offences in military law not found in the civilian environment, for example, absence without leave. I find it difficult to accept that a soldier absent without leave is different from any other member of society not being present to perform his or her vital duties. Seemingly, according to Judge Carroll, it comes to obedience to commands being integrated into a soldier's existence.

Maintenance of good order and discipline is a key element in Army life and it further comes down to the soldier's principal role in defending national security where he or she may be called upon to put their lives on the line or to entrust their lives to fellow soldiers. It seems that breaches of discipline in the Army are more catastrophic than breaches of discipline in any other walk of life. If we talk about military law and military justice being separate and distinct from civil law and justice, I find that alarming.

Any member of the State, military or otherwise, is entitled to justice, to a fair and open trial with judges who are impartial. How impartial is a military judge when it comes to breaches of discipline in the military when his whole life has been dedicated to maintaining that discipline above any other consideration? We talk about the integrity of our District, Circuit, High and Supreme courts. That same integrity must be central to military courts also.

If we look at the White Paper on Defence, the goal was to ensure that the State had a modern defence force. I also want to pay tribute to our Defence Forces on their overseas missions, where they are held in very high regard on peacekeeping missions. Their respect for the native people in those areas has been acknowledged, as has their engagement and interaction there. Within Ireland the role of the Air Corps in rescue operations and our Naval Service in patrolling our waters has been acknowledged. Going back to the White Paper, certain reforms were set out, downsizing and transforming it into a more effective force and supposedly bringing about savings. We can see from the statistics the significant drop in numbers. I know this is disappointing for many young men and women who are interested in joining the Defence Forces. I hope that interest will continue.

Expanding the candidature for appointment, which will increase the potential pool of qualified personnel, makes sense, as does the section which permits the Circuit Court to perform functions of the military judge in certain circumstances. There are times when additional support is needed for an alterative. What is being proposed for Ireland has happened in other countries, such as Australia and Britain where civil and legal principles and standards are applied to aspects of the military legal process. I agree with the system that operates in Australia, where a committee set up to investigate this area criticised the existing military discipline system and recommended major change to ensure "independence and impartiality in the military justice system". Our Defence Forces deserve that independence and impartiality, but I note the story is not over yet in Australia.

Going back to our Defence Forces, according to the Minister for Defence they are primarily deployed on overseas missions in support of international peace and security under the UN mandate. We are, in theory at least, a neutral country, so why is Shannon Airport being used by US troops in the way it has been since the Iraq war? Our troops are on peacekeeping missions while our airport is being used by a country on aggressive action, using horrendous methods of torture on those taken prisoner. It is time to stop Shannon Airport being used in this way. Another issue is the amount of Garda resources being expended to control peaceful demonstrations. It appears under the current Government that there has been an increase in the numbers of gardaí involved in that regard.

I am interested in the presence of seven members of our Permanent Defence Force in Afghanistan, three in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, two in the Ivory Coast and five in Somalia, training Somalian security forces. This is a token military presence in countries which have appalling records on human rights issues and I wonder about the role of our troops there.

The Minister stated that discipline is the essence of military force and referred to what he termed the unique code of discipline in the Army necessary to support operational effectiveness, but also to be fair to the individual. The Bill is technical in nature, and it is sensible given the limited number of qualified personnel in the Permanent Defence Force available for these jobs. I was alarmed to read about the personal situation and the speculation regarding a particular individual but I will take the Minister's word - rightly or wrongly - that, as he stated, this legislation is in the public interest and in the interest of both the Defence Forces and the individuals who are awaiting the determination of their cases. I believe our Defence Forces deserve a high standard in the courts.

See this speech in context