Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The impact of the amendments would be to remove from the Minister for Justice and Equality the function under section 96 of the Garda Síochána Act of determining whether certain information or material could be made available to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission where it has been claimed that matters of national security are involved. Having considered the amendments, I am of the view that, given that the security of the State is a priority function of government, the task of deciding whether information or material can be withheld on security grounds should remain with the Minister in his or her capacity as a member of the Government. Protecting the security of the State is an important obligation on the Government. As such, the proposal to transfer responsibility for decisions on matters that impact on the security of the State to an entity other than the Government is not the right direction in which to go.

It is incumbent on a Minister for Justice and Equality to ensure the relevant functions under section 96 are discharged properly and impartially. As Deputies will be aware, there are a number of areas where important security related matters are dealt with by the Minister, including authorising the interception of communications. These are serious and important functions. It is appropriate that decisions involving the security of the State should remain with a Minister.

I note Deputy Mac Lochlainn foresees in amendment No. 5 a specific role for a member of the Judiciary. Section 100 of the Garda Síochána Act provides for the appointment of a designated High Court judge to keep under review the operation of certain provisions of the Act, including section 96, which relate to the security of the State.

I believe those arrangements are prudent; they are in place and they are working. A judge is designated to that position, prepares a report on an ongoing basis and can make a report to the Taoiseach if any concerns arise. I have no doubt a judge in such a position would do just that because that is their job. If there is anything they see in the work that is being done that they feel needs to be changed, or if they have concerns, they are given that obligation and that job to do.

Section 100 provides for judicial oversight of certain provisions of the Act that relate to the security of the State. To explain this the Members of the House, it requires the President of the High Court, after consulting with the Minister, to invite a judge of the court to agree. I should say in that regard that once the President of the High Court would nominate a judge, that would obviously be accepted by the Government and there would be no question expressing a preference for another judge. The President of the High Court would make the nomination and I have no doubt the practice is to accept it. As I said, it is to keep under review the areas I have mentioned but also to report to the Taoiseach from time to time concerning any matters relating to the operation of those sections or regulations that the judge considers should be reported.

That oversight is contained in section 100 of the Act. I do not believe it is appropriate to hand over to anyone else the decision-making around security material in the context of this legislation. I ask Deputies to consider whether one would actually want to say that a Minister of the Government would not have this responsibility in regard to security matters.

See this speech in context