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

I move: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am pleased to bring the Bill before the House. It marks a significant step forward in ensuring that Ireland’s counterterrorism framework is robust and fit for purpose in the face of modern terrorist threats. The Bill will amend the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005, a cornerstone of lreland’s counterterrorism laws, to allow for a broader category of prosecutable offences in respect of terrorist activity. These include terrorist acts with a cross-border element and cyberattacks where the aim is to cause widespread harm.

The Bill is part of Ireland’s commitment to bring our terrorism laws into line with those of other EU member states, through our participation in the EU directive on combating terrorism, which this legislation provides for. Its passing will also pave the way for Ireland's participation in enhanced EU counterterrorism networks, enabling a co-ordinated and dynamic response to domestic and cross-border terrorist threats. Enactment of this Bill is a commitment in the programme for Government, and supports the broader programme commitment to strengthen national security.

Ireland has comprehensive counterterrorism laws, found in the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act and the Offences Against the States Acts, which we debated yesterday. The Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act, in particular, represents a response by Ireland to the shared threat terrorism poses across the EU and beyond. Successive EU counterterrorism agreements have been given effect to in Ireland via this Act. This has resulted in harmonised definitions of terrorist offences with our EU counterparts, as well as minimum rules when it comes to sentencing terrorist offences. This provides a benchmark for co-operation and information exchange between national authorities and prevents the existence of legal loopholes that may be exploited by terrorists.

Notwithstanding this, the nature of terrorism continues to evolve. In 2017, in response to the growing threat posed by people travelling abroad for the purpose of terrorism, the heightened security threat they pose when returning home and the increasing threats from citizens inspired or instructed by terrorist groups abroad, the EU updated its counterterrorism framework with the directive on combating terrorism. This followed concern expressed by the UN Security Council over these threats, and instruction to UN member states to ensure domestic laws were sufficient to prosecute and penalise such activities.

The EU’s directive on combatting terrorism reaffirmed many of the Union’s established counterterrorism measures and terrorist offences. With Ireland having fully incorporated such measures into our national laws and practices, it meant Irish law was aligned with many of the requirements of the directive. However, new offences were also introduced to tackle the international and cross-border dimension to the terrorist threat previously discussed. It remains incumbent on Ireland to transpose these offences into our national law.

Travel for the purpose of terrorism is a new offence that the Bill incorporates. This recognises the need to stem the flow of terrorist fighters in and out of the country. Travelling to Ireland and travelling from Ireland for the purposes of committing, aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of terrorism is criminalised. The act of organising or facilitating travel for the purposes of terrorism will also be an offence, with the same elements as the travel offence, save for the prohibited act being that of making arrangements to enable any person to travel to or from the State for the purposes of terrorism.

The Bill criminalises receiving training for the purpose of terrorism. This will complement the offence of providing training for terrorism, which is on our Statute Book. It addresses threats resulting from actively preparing for the commission of terrorist offences and can be committed by those ultimately acting alone and training through self-study. It can involve receiving training in the making of explosives, chemical or biological weapons and other relevant technical expertise.

Like with the offence of providing training for terrorism, there will be a ministerial regulation-making power in prohibiting other weapons and techniques that could be part of such training. This means that should new technologies, materials or practices be developed in the future that could be used to carry out terrorist acts, there is scope to preclude training in their use. Knowledge that the training is for the purposes of committing, aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of terrorism is required to be convicted of this crime. This means collecting materials for legitimate purposes, such as academic research, would not be considered to be receiving training for terrorism.

Under our counterterrorism laws, it is an offence to distribute public messages aimed at provoking the commission of terrorist offences. Publicly sharing messages with invitations to join terrorist groups, calls to action or denigrating the victims of terrorism is prohibited where such behaviour is intended to, and causes a danger that, terrorist acts may be committed.

In recent years, sophisticated digital messaging tools, including high-quality video, assisted by a network of social media accounts, has allowed for the rapid dissemination of terrorist messaging. This has included videos celebrating or praising horrendous terrorist acts like assassinations and terrorist bombings. This Bill re-articulates the offence of public provocation to commit terrorism to clarify that such provocation can be done by distributing messages that glorify terrorism.

Conviction for the offences I have just spoken about can lead to a maximum prison sentence of ten years. The Bill also provides that when existing offences of recruitment and training for terrorism are directed towards a child, the courts can treat this circumstance as an aggravating factor when sentencing offenders. This recognises the particularly egregious nature of luring minors into the word of terrorism.

It is acknowledged that the activities these offences prohibit involve commonplace acts such as travel and study, or indeed the sharing of content on public platforms which is now a widespread and daily occurrence in our lives. These are acts that in a free and modern society we should be at liberty to participate in, engage in and enjoy unconstrained when carried out without nefarious aims. That is why the notion of terrorist intention will always be an essential element required to convict someone of the offences in this Bill, with the intentional nature of an act inferred from objective and factual circumstances. For example, it will be necessary to show the intention was to provoke the commission of terrorist acts when publicly sharing messages glorifying terrorism. Furthermore, there must also be a reasonable apprehension that the commission of a terrorist activity could in fact result.

The Bill will also categorise cyber offences already on our Statute Book as terrorist offences and, therefore, allow for extra years to be added to terms of imprisonment for those convicted when the offence is intended to cause widespread harm. These are the offences of interfering with or damaging data or IT systems and where the result could be serious damage to State or international organisations, major economic loss or creating a collective danger to the lives of citizens. We have seen in recent years the destruction and devastation caused by cyber attacks on our national infrastructure. These are grave affronts to our society and it is appropriate that they be treated as terrorist offences. Potential offenders should know that they will meet the full force of the law should they proceed to carry out such attacks.

I have spoken previously about how this Bill will pave the way for lreland’s participation in enhanced counterterrorism networks. Once enacted and when Ireland is fully participating in the EU’s directive on combating terrorism, we will be a position to adopt subsequent EU counterterrorism measures. This includes partaking in a programme of modernisation occurring at Eurojust, the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation, which co-ordinates investigations and information exchange on cross-border crime across Europe. Its modernisation programme includes strengthening its counterterrorism register and case management system. What this means is that cross-border links between terrorism investigations and prosecutions will be more easily and readily identified, and information more swiftly shared among member states via secure digital communication channels. This will ultimately lead to more terrorist acts being prevented and more terrorists being brought to justice.

The Bill contains nine sections and one Schedule. Section 1 simply clarifies that references to the principal Act relate to the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005, which is being amended here. Section 2 amends section 4 of the principal Act by replacing references to the 2002 EU Council framework decision on combating terrorism with that of the 2017 EU directive, which is the new EU governing instrument underlying our international counterterrorism laws. This section also signposts new definitions for offences found in latter sections of the Bill. This includes definitions for the three new offences of receiving training for terrorism, travelling for the purpose of terrorism and organising or otherwise facilitating travel for the purpose of terrorism. It also signposts the existing offence of providing training for terrorism which is redefined in this Bill.

Section 3 provides a revised definition of the offence of public provocation to commit a terrorist offence. The revised definition sets out that glorification of a terrorist activity, including by praise or celebration, may be considered publicly provoking the commission of a terrorist offence, provided that other critical elements of the offence have been satisfied.

Thus, it must be shown that he or she possessed the requisite intention of inciting persons to commit a terrorist activity when he or she distributed, published, or caused to be distributed or published, a message that glorified, including by praise or celebration, a terrorist activity. It is also a requirement of the offence that such distribution or publication must have given rise to the reasonable apprehension that the commission of a terrorist activity could thereby result. These additional elements serve to act as safeguards in ensuring that it is only those who set about to deliberately incite terrorist activity who are captured by this offence.

I am aware some concern was expressed that the enactment of this provision could result in a prosecution similar to that taking place in England at present in respect of the band Kneecap. This is something that will not happen here and I will explain why this is so. If we look at the new provision to be introduced in section 3, the offence is committed when a person, with the intention of inciting persons to commit a terrorist activity, distributes or publishes, or causes to be distributed or published, by any means, to the public, a message inciting terrorist activity or that glorifies terrorist activity, and such distribution gives rise to the reasonable apprehension that the commission of the activity could thereby result. In order for somebody to be convicted of an offence under this section, they have to be engaged in the activity for the purpose and intention of inciting people to commit a terrorist offence. This is not something that could happen in respect of the circumstances regarding Kneecap. The difference between what happens in Ireland and what happens in England and Wales is that Kneecap are being prosecuted under section 13 of the Terrorism 2000 Act of England and Wales. I will quote what this provides. It is an extraordinarily broad offence and it is not something that would be enacted in Ireland. The offence in England and Wales is as follows:

A person in a public place commits an offence if he— [...]

(b) wears, carries or displays an article, in such a way or in such circumstances as to arouse reasonable suspicion that he is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation.

Under the legislation in England and Wales there is absolutely no requirement for someone's behaviour to come with the intention of seeking to cause the committal of a terrorist offence. All it simply requires is that in a public place someone wears or displays an article that would arouse suspicion that the person is a supporter of a prescribed organisation.

As Members will be aware, and I do not want to comment too much about an ongoing prosecution in England, the band Kneecap is being prosecuted on the basis they displayed a flag attached to Hezbollah. If that concert had happened in Ireland with the flag of Hezbollah, the band could not be prosecuted under section 4A of the new terrorist offences Act, unless they accompanied it with a clear intention to get people to commit a terrorist offence, which is something completely different.

The legislation in England and Wales is completely broad and simply requires someone to wear or display something that arouses a suspicion that they are a supporter of a prescribed organisation. When we are discussing it, people need to take into account the marked difference between the two statutory provisions, namely, what we are proposing in Ireland and what exists at present under section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000 in England and Wales.

Section 4 of this Bill sets out a new definition for the existing offence of providing training for terrorism and inserts a definition for the new offence of receiving training for terrorism. It also includes a standard provision allowing for the making of ministerial regulations. The power to make regulations is required in order that the Minister may, if deemed necessary, add to the list of prohibited weapons, techniques or methods covered by the offences of providing training and receiving training for terrorism.

Section 5 sets out the new offence of travel for the purpose of terrorism. This criminalises travel to and from the State for the purposes of committing a terrorist offence, aiding and abetting another person to commit a terrorist offence, or providing training or receiving training for terrorism. The same section also makes it an offence to knowingly organise or facilitate travel for the purpose of terrorism.

Section 6 provides that the penalty on conviction for any of the new offences introduced by the Bill is a fine or imprisonment for up to ten years or both. This section also provides that, when sentencing on conviction for the offences of recruitment to terrorism or providing training for terrorism, a court may consider as an aggravating factor the fact that the offence was committed against a child.

Section 7 replaces the text of the 2002 EU Council framework decision on combating terrorism in Schedule 1 of the principal Act with that of the 2017 EU directive. It also deletes Schedule 1A, containing the text of EU Council Framework Decision 2008/919/JHA, which is no longer in force.

Section 8 amends Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the principal Act. This lists certain offences already on our Statute Book that can be considered terrorist offences in certain contexts and so form part of the definition of "terrorist activity" in the principal Act. The section provides for the insertion of a new paragraph 6A to this Part, inserting into this list offences under sections 3 and 4 of the Criminal Justice (Offences Relating to Information Systems) Act 2017. The effect of this is that the offences of interference with an information system, or data without lawful authority, would constitute terrorist activity if intended to seriously intimidate a population, unduly compel a government or an international organisation to perform or abstain from performing an act, or seriously destabilise or destroy the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a state or an international organisation.

Section 9 is a standard provision providing for the Short Title of the Bill once enacted, the collective citation for the Bill and related Acts, and the commencement date.

I am pleased the Bill is appropriate and necessary. When we look at our terrorist legislation at present, there are certain areas where there are gaps, and the purpose of the Bill is to ensure these gaps are filled. As I emphasised earlier, it is also important to recall that in order for a person to be found guilty of committing an offence under this new legislation, it is essential that the person must have the intention to incite others to commit terrorist activity or to be involved themselves in terrorist activity. This is not legislation that can or could be used for the purpose of trying to stymie artistic displays or individuals who may, shortsightedly, wish to glorify terrorist activity in the past. Bizarrely, people who want to do this can do so but they will only find themselves criminalised in circumstances where they are doing this glorification for the purposes of inciting others to commit a serious criminal offence.

It is important to point out that the Bill includes the same definition of "terrorist activity" as is included in the 2005 Act. The definition recognises that terrorist activity is a reference to what we know as serious scheduled offences. We know that in the definition under the 2005 Act "terrorist activity" means an act that is committed in or outside the State and that if committed in the State would constitute an offence specified in Part 1 of Schedule 2. We are speaking about activity that is already criminal activity. People need not be fearful that, in some respect, this legislation will engage with people who, as I have said, do not have the intention of seeking to promote or incite the commission of a terrorist act.

New terrorist acts are being created in the Bill, such as training of terrorism or teaching of terrorism, but they are appropriate when we look at the climate that exists at present in terms of where the threat from terrorism lies. People may wish to cast a sceptical eye on terrorist offences legislation enacted in the House but we cannot get away from the fact that terrorist activity continues to exist. Certain people believe it is acceptable for them to use violence against citizens and against the State for the purpose of trying to achieve their political purposes. We in this country know that the only way to really achieve political purposes in a democratic society is through debate, discussion and, ultimately, democracy. I commend the Bill to the House and I will listen attentively to what colleagues have to say.

See this speech in context