Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Every year since 1998, when the Offences against the State (Amendment) Bill was enacted, there has been a debate in this House to discuss whether we should continue with the 12 sections contained within it. This is the fourth occasion on which I have had the opportunity to speak on these motions. Fianna Fáil will support them. The reason is the information laid before the House and our knowledge of what is happening in the real world in respect of terrorist offences. We know from the report and other sources of knowledge that there is, unfortunately, a domestic threat in this country from dissident republican groups. They want to impose their political views on the people of this island through the use of violence. We have seen that recently through the murder of Lyra McKee, as the Minister stated. We have also seen it through the increased threat posed to the officers of the PSNI by members of dissident republican groups. We know from information provided by An Garda Síochána, which is outlined in the report, that the Garda believes these provisions are necessary and important in enabling it to fight against the serious dissident groups that need to be defeated. The people of this country need to be defended against them, particularly given that the groups do not recognise at all the democratic wish of the people expressed in the Good Friday Agreement referendum in 1998.

The report also mentions the international threat. There is unquestionably an international threat from terrorism, which is precipitated by events outside this island. It is important to make two points in this respect. First, we are fortunate in this country that we have a Muslim population living on this island who are peaceful and want to ensure they have a peaceful life for themselves and their families. We have been fortunate in that we do not have the type of radicalisation of members of the Islamic community seen in the United Kingdom, France and other European countries. That is to be welcomed. I am sure there are reasons for it that can be explained from our history. Part of the reason is the welcome people from different faiths receive when they come to this country. It is unquestionably the case that there is an international threat, however. Even if there were not, we would still be justified in extending these 12 provisions because of the domestic threat here.

The second motion deals with section 8 of the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009. That Act provided for the creation of a number of new offences in respect of what is known as gangland crime. It provides that those offences should be scheduled offences that may be determined by the Special Criminal Court. Fianna Fáil will also support that motion. If there is a vote, we will support it tomorrow.

The Minister stated that some Members are concerned about the role of the Special Criminal Court in the criminal justice system; I am not. The court comes within our constitutional system. Article 38.3.1° of the Constitution states special courts may be established by law for the trial of offences where the ordinary courts are inadequate to secure the effective administration of justice. It is very easy to adopt a purist view in respect of this and say we should only every have trial of offences by jury of one’s peers but we do not live in a pure world. That was recognised in back in 1937 when the Constitution was enacted. The facts of what we have seen happening on the ground in Ireland for very many years confirm, unfortunately, that there is a need for the Special Criminal Court. When one considers the gangland violence in Dublin and throughout the country, one realises there are those in the drugs business who are prepared to kill people in order to convenience themselves and preserve their wealth. They would certainly kill people to preserve their liberty and prevent themselves from going to jail. We have seen in the past that they have murdered journalists who have been sticking their nose into their drugs trade. If it were the case that we did not have a Special Criminal Court or if there were no option for the DPP to pursue prosecution before the Special Criminal Court, we would have juries that would have to make determinations on serious trials of gangland individuals. It is beyond question that those serious gangland criminals would seek to intimidate, threaten and perhaps even kill members of a jury.

7 o’clock

If that happened, what consequence would it have for the next time they were prosecuted for the offence? It is not tenable to adopt a purist view and argue there should never be a prosecution unless by a jury. We must live in the real world. We saw what happened in Limerick a number of years ago where it was impossible for a jury to be empanelled in respect of a serious murder charge because of intimidation of people in the local community. Although it may be the case in a pure world that we would have no Special Criminal Court, we are perfectly entitled to one in the constitutional world in which we live.

The Minister has set out the views of the Garda authorities in the report, and that the Garda Commissioner has informed him that this legislation is proving to be an effective tool in tackling organised criminal groups involved in a range of the most serious criminal activities. It is the Garda Commissioner's view that the provisions of section 8 of the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009 are aimed to target such criminal behaviour and assist greatly in the investigations of the activities being planned and committed by organised crime gangs operating in this jurisdiction. We do not have to accept that blindly just because the Garda Commissioner said it but it is important information to assist Members in making their decision on whether a Special Criminal Court is required.

If the Special Criminal Court is such a dangerous and unfair forum, I challenge Members to point to a miscarriage of justice there recently. I cannot think of one but perhaps others are able to. The reason for the Special Criminal Court is to protect jurors. They are constituents, the same as anyone else. Any one of our constituents could be selected to serve on a jury. We have an obligation to try to protect them and we should not expose them to the risk of violence or intimidation if they are required to deal with serious trials of gangland criminals. We need to introduce some reality into this, rather than purism, and for the reasons I have given, Fianna Fáil will support both motions.

See this speech in context