Michael McNamara (Clare, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State has said that of course national security information cannot be made available to the appellant and recited in open court to be written about. That is not the way our legal system has operated up to now. Essentially, the Garda, the Director of Public Prosecutions or whoever is prosecuting a case has a determination to make. They have evidence and have two choices. If they want to use the evidence against an accused, they have to do so in open court and the defendant has to have access to it. That is how the administration of justice works in Ireland. If they are not prepared to do that, they simply cannot rely on that evidence as part of proceedings. They will have to have to seek to convict using other evidence.

This, of course, is not the status quo. It is not the way our justice system operates at the moment. In fact, it is the contrary. That is why this is a very new departure. Information can be used which is not provided to the other party. Nowhere else has this been done in Irish law up to now. It is something that needs an awful lot more debate. The Minister of State thinks it is entirely self-evident that information cannot be used against somebody. However, under the Irish justice system at the moment the accused is of course provided with all of the evidence that will be used against him or her in court by way of disclosure. We have a choice about whether we use that evidence, with the difficulties that entails.

There are two "of courses" and the Minister of State seems to think this proposal is perfectly rational. His position is not one that is out of kilter with other European states, but it is out of kilter with the administration of justice in Ireland. I am not happy for that Rubicon to be crossed without a vote.

Will each section be included in the Bill? Once we get to the end of the amendments, is that it? Do we then vote on the Bill or do we go through it section by section? Will the Acting Chairman ask that section 1 stand part of the Bill, section 2 and so forth?

See this speech in context