Dáil debates

Thursday, 9 March 2017

Universal Jurisdiction of Human Rights Bill 2015: Second Stage [Private Members]

 

7:15 pm

Photo of Andrew DoyleAndrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am glad that I was given this shift to listen to what has been a very interesting debate. It is in the spirit of what the Irish people have stood for during the years. Whether one accepts that we are neutral, we have always sought to bring human rights issues to the fore and advocated across all continents for the education and empowerment of local peoples and communities, whether through our sometimes now maligned religious orders and missions, or NGOs. We have always had that spirit of trying to advocate for others. It stems from our past when we were suppressed. Education and liberty were things we had sought for many centuries.

I do not doubt the sincerity of the intentions of the Bill. I have taken on board what has been said, as have the officials of the Tánaiste's Department. We have to bear in mind, however, that we are bound by Article 29.8 of the Constitution which limits us in the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction to generally recognise the principles of international law. The Attorney General is of the opinion that the Bill may be unconstitutional in that context. I have gone through it before and do not propose to do so again, but there are a couple of points I will make.

I cannot proclaim to be an expert, but there could be cases, hypothetical or not, in which an Irish national would be tried under this provision in another state and his or her extradition would be sought. Our first duty is to our own citizens and as such, we would have to ensure the bona fides of the trial or prosecution would stand up. As Deputy Jim O'Callaghan said, he has a wariness of trials in absentia. In the case of somebody to be tried for an international crime of the nature described in the proposed Bill and of such severity, in the first instance, he or she would have a right to defend himself or herself. In some states we could not guarantee the right of an Irish citizen to a fair trial. For balance, we have to bear that in mind.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan mentioned the UN Security Council. As far as I know, we are trying to become a member again to have a seat at the table. I represented the Government during the presentation of credentials by the ambassadors of Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Fiji in Áras an Uachtaráin this day last week. President Michael D. Higgins asked for their support for Ireland's case. He was engaged in a little advocacy in the way we all know only he can do. The aim is to give Ireland a voice at the UN Security Council as a small nation with a history of showing concern for human rights across the globe. That is important. Against the big nations and the permanent representatives on the Council, it is important that small nations are listened to and also have representation on it.

My final point is not in the context of the Bill but is important regarding places of conflict. Not that long ago Syria was a safe haven for people from the Lebanon. Now it seems to be the other way around. Ireland's Defence Forces were part of UN peacekeeping missions in these countries. This had tragic consequences for some members of the Defence Forces which have always sought to bring peace to areas of conflict. There are courts - I am not saying they are all perfect - which deal with international war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. It is not perfect, but at the end of day we are bound by the Constitution. The Government's advice is that the Bill, as presented, is not constitutional. As a Government, we are duty bound to listen to the advice of the Attorney General.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.