Paul McAuliffe (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

79. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his response to the recent Council of Europe decision on Northern Ireland legacy issues; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13508/23]

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

115. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he will outline his most recent engagements with the UK Government on its Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill following the recent decision adopted by the Council of Europe; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13614/23]

Seán Haughey (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This question relates to the recent Council of Europe decision on Northern Ireland legacy issues. I welcome the opportunity to hear the Tánaiste's views on that decision by the Council of Europe. I ask him to give an update on the Government's role in opposing the legacy legislation that has been brought forward and is due to become law later this year.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 79 and 115 together.

The Good Friday Agreement says we can best honour those who died or were injured, and their families, through a firm dedication to reconciliation, tolerance and mutual trust, and to the protection and vindication of the human rights of all. This has framed the Government’s approach to the legacy of the past in Northern Ireland. The needs of victims must be core and all relevant human rights obligations must be met. Dealing effectively with the past will allow the achievement of a more reconciled society.

In Stormont House in 2014, the two Governments and most of the Assembly parties agreed a way forward on legacy which would meet the needs of victims, uphold human rights and contribute to reconciliation, an approach endorsed again in the Fresh Start and New Decade, New Approach agreements. However, in May 2022, with the publication of its Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill, the United Kingdom Government decided to move away from the Stormont House Agreement and take a unilateral approach to dealing with the past. Since the publication of that legacy Bill, the Committee of Ministers has on four occasions - in June, September and December 2022 and again this month - expressed its serious concerns about the Bill and its compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights. While the process itself is confidential, my officials have briefed Council of Europe member states regularly on our concerns and have made the Government's views clear in formal sessions.

The United Kingdom Government published amendments to its Bill in January and February. However, the Committee of Ministers in its decision last week expressed the "serious concern that those amendments do not sufficiently allay the concerns about the Bill". Other major international human rights actors have also made their views known. We have heard the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights express his concerns with the Bill, in particular its immunity scheme, and he has called on the United Kingdom to reconsider its approach.

It is important to recall that the legacy Bill does not have the support of any political party in Northern Ireland or of victims’ groups. Enactment in its current form risks severely damaging trust and setting back reconciliation efforts. I know from my own direct engagements with a range of families directly affected that as the United Kingdom’s legacy Bill progresses, the anxiety of victims and communities in Northern Ireland about the prospect that other avenues to truth and justice could be closed to them grows. Every family deserves and is legally entitled to an effective investigation and access to justice for their loved one. This is a point I have repeatedly made to my counterparts in the British Government and I will continue to do so. I have urged, and continue to urge, them to pause this legislation and return to a partnership approach on this vital issue that goes to the heart of the process of reconciliation.

The decision of Strasbourg’s Committee of Ministers also referred to the recent High Court decision on the Pat Finucane case, which declared that there has still not been an Article 2 compliant inquiry into Mr. Finucane’s death.

The committee “exhorted the authorities to provide their full and clear response to the Supreme Court judgement as soon as possible." It has been the consistent and firmly held position of the Government that a full and independent public inquiry, as provided for under the Weston Park Agreement in 2001, is the right way forward on this case, and the best way for the UK Government to uphold its Article 2 obligations. I reiterate the need for the UK Government to take this step.

Seán Haughey (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As we have heard, the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill is due to become law later this year. There has been widespread opposition to this Bill from the Irish Government, from all of the political parties in the North, from victims' groups and their families, and from several human rights organisations. The Bill was published unilaterally by the British Government and is a departure from the Stormont House Agreement of 2014. In response, the British Government brought forward some amendments, as the Tánaiste said, but these do not go nearly far enough. The Council of Europe has stated that the proposed legislation will not be compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights and that it will not allow for effective investigations into all outstanding cases. Will the Tánaiste assure the House that he will keep up the pressure on the British Government to withdraw this legislation? It is deeply offensive to so many people. What else can the Tánaiste do in this regard? Will he reassure the Members that everything will be done to try to persuade the British Government to withdraw this legislation?

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One of the very few occasions in my long service here where I attended a meeting with a viewpoint that was supported by every political party of the island of Ireland was at a meeting in Belfast City Hall during which the legacy Bill was opposed. I have never signed a document that was signed by every shade of opinion, nationalist, republican and unionist, North and South, in opposition to this Bill. The Tánaiste obviously warmly welcomed the decision of the Council of Europe and its Council of Ministers. It is the fourth iteration of its concerns. The proposals the British Government made are not compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights.

In the improved relationship with Britain, does the Tánaiste feel there is a real prospect now of moving it away from the enactment of this legislation? I am interested in hearing the Tánaiste's opinion on that. Is it a situation where the unthinkable might happen where the United Kingdom, one of the founding members of the European Convention on Human Rights, might resile from that convention?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First, on Deputy Haughey's questions, again we have been strong and robust in our exchanges with the UK Government in respect of this legacy Bill. We think it is a wrong thing to do; it has no agreement within Northern Ireland. I met with victims who are extremely angry about it and are very concerned about its implications. I will marry Deputy Haughey's question with that of Deputy Howlin in saying that there has been a degree of unilateralism in the conceiving, and the writing up, of this Bill and its passage through Parliament. In the context of the Good Friday Agreement, unilateralism does not work and is not appropriate to it. We are co-guarantors of the agreement and I have always been concerned during the prime ministership of Boris Johnson about that trend towards unilateralism emerging on a number of fronts. There has been an improvement under the government of Rishi Sunak and far better engagement on these issues. To take the Deputy's point, however, there has not been improvements on the legacy Bill. There have been some amendments but they go nowhere near our red lines. I detect that not everybody within the UK system, if I can put it that way, or in the UK Parliament, is satisfied with this. The Deputy is correct in pointing out that historically, the UK Government had the least to fear from the European Convention on Human Rights. Those in Strasbourg will tell you that the least number of cases are taken against the UK Government.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a founding member of it.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a founding member but this seems to be pandering to an election mandate, manifesto and so on. It shows significant disregard of the plight and the wishes of victims in Northern Ireland in respect of their having the capacity to have investigations into their loved ones carried out and closure brought to their situations.

To answer Deputy Haughey's question, we will continue to engage with the British Government on this. It is engaging with our officials on this but we are awaiting further amendments. We think the best thing to do, and have said this to the British Government, is to pause. We are raising this at every international forum because it is a fundamental matter in respect of human rights but also in respect of the Good Friday Agreement.

Seán Haughey (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I raise another legacy issue, which is the issue of the Omagh bombing in 1998. Last month, in response to the finding of a High Court judge, Lord Justice Horner, the British Government announced that it intends to establish an independent statutory inquiry into the 1998 Omagh bombing. This bomb, which was planted by the Real IRA, killed 29 people, including a woman pregnant with twins, and injured hundreds of others. It is suggested that there were security failings in the lead-up to the attack. Has the Irish Government been contacted about this inquiry announced by the British Government? Have the terms of reference been finalised? How will the Irish authorities engage with the inquiry? Will any Garda files on the matter be made available to the inquiry, for example? Any further information the Tánaiste could give me in that regard would be appreciated.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In terms of having a strategy to stop this Bill being enacted, has the Tánaiste had discussions with other parties in the Westminster Parliament? They could be with the Labour Party, being the largest party of opposition, to see how it can work towards stopping it or with the House of Lords in terms of its input, which has been effective in terms of Brexit negotiations in the past. My second question is on the compliance with the convention in relation to the Pat Finucane case and whether there has been any progress in ensuring the requirements of the decision of the Council of Europe in relation to that case will be complied with by the British authorities.

Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I accept the Tánaiste has been robust in his dealings with the British Government around this legacy Bill, amnesty Bill or whatever one calls it. I have my own view. I have said to him previously that this is a British Government that will never accept a certain element of truth and justice for victims in the sense that it sees that as the British state having to admit to being involved in running death squads in Ireland. I accept that many things happened during the conflict which we all wish did not happen. That is a fact. I ask about the Tánaiste's engagement at an official or a governmental level. I accept things have improved and the mood music has improved as regards Rishi Sunak. The Tánaiste said he wants this paused, wants amendments and wants this ended on the basis there is no support for it. What is the engagement in this regard? What is he getting back from the British Government? If it is a disaster and the British Government ploughs ahead, are we looking at any alternatives from a legal point of view or whatever else?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In terms of the Omagh bombing, we have to keep on saying that what happened in Omagh was an unspeakable act of barbarity and cruelty. The terrorists who carried the bombing out had no sense of any humanity and they displayed a complete and shocking disregard for human life. We welcome the announcement of the UK that it intends to hold a public inquiry. We got a heads-up and there was engagement with the Secretary of State in terms of his decision to go ahead with this. I have discussed possible next steps with the Minister for Justice, in particular, and with my Government colleagues in terms of how we take this further. We are awaiting details from the UK Government about its proposed inquiry in the first instance which will then help inform our deliberations, essentially as regards the terms of reference and so on and how we then respond to that.

10 o’clock

On strategy, we have been in contact with the British Labour Party and others. Our officials and I, both in my previous capacity as Taoiseach and as Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, have met Labour Party representatives. We have also taken soundings in the House of Lords. There is much concern in the British Parliament about this legacy Bill. I have raised it directly with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, who has indicated that there will be further amendments and has kept us informed.

Regarding compliance with the investigation into the death of Pat Finucane, there have been no further developments. In addition, there has been no further progress in the UK Government's response.

In response to Deputy Ó Murchú, we have engaged on a range of issues, particularly with regard to the Kenova and Denton investigations. It is our view that they should be exempt from this legislation and allowed to complete their work. I accept that this was in response to a British Government commitment in respect of security forces, which I do not accept. I put it to the Deputy that Sinn Féin needs to do more for truth and justice for victims of atrocities that the Provisional IRA carried out. I have met many victims who cannot get satisfactory closure in respect of atrocities carried out by the Provisional IRA, which were endorsed by Sinn Féin.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are over time.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They continue to be endorsed by Sinn Féin. I respectfully put it to the Deputy that there is an issue which Sinn Féin needs to deal with, because it undermines its credibility to attack the British Government for its failure in respect of some security issues and then for victims to still not get answers.

Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are against this legislation across the board. That relates to all victims.