Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

130. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the timeframe in which he intends to enact legislation giving effect to the rulings of the International Court of Justice regarding the trade of goods and services with illegal Israeli settlements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15462/25]

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The rulings of the International Court of Justice are very clear. They oblige states to prohibit the trade of goods and services with illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. Will the Tánaiste outline the timeframe in which he will enact legislation and is such legislation intended to ban trade in both goods and services?

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is obviously a similar question to the one I answered for the Deputy's party colleague, Deputy Ó Laoghaire, but I am happy to answer again. The programme for Government sets out a commitment to progress legislation regarding the occupied Palestinian territories following the July 2024 International Court of Justice advisory opinion. I was the Taoiseach who requested specific bespoke advice from the Attorney General once the ICJ gave its advisory opinion to see if there was a way forward to passing legislation. That enabled the Government to re-evaluate its position to see if progress could be made. As the Deputy will recall, the Government carried out an extensive analysis and review of the occupied territories Bill late last year.

11 o’clock

The Government's analysis was that substantive amendments would be required to most if not all of the Bill's provisions to bring it in line with our Constitution and to make sure we have legislation that has a decent chance of standing up to EU infringement procedures. I am sure we want to pass a Bill that can withstand those legal challenges. These considerations remain central to the Government's approach.

I will meet Senator Black, as the sponsor of the Bill, next Tuesday to provide her with the most up-to-date information I have, to seek her views and to make a decision on how Government intends to proceed. Consistent with the position of the European Union, Ireland is clear that policies and measures that distinguish between the State of Israel and Israeli settlements, which are illegal under international law, do not constitute a boycott of the State of Israel. There is a clear differentiation between the State of Israel and Israeli settlements. That is recognised in the position paper published and unanimously agreed by all EU countries in advance of the EU-Israel association agreement council meeting which took place on 24 February, I believe.

In parallel with following up at national level, Ireland continues to press for appropriate follow-up at EU level to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. I welcome that, at the recent association council meeting with Israel, the EU underlined its commitment to fully comply with international law and to implement legislation and technical arrangements applicable to settlement products accordingly. It is now important the EU also exercises due diligence and ensures its approach to settlement products is compliant with international law.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One of the reasons we are in the situation we are in is that, for decades, Israel flagrantly breached international law and faced no consequences. If only we could get an understanding of why the world was able to turn a blind eye for so long, but the evidence is in how the world has turned away in large part from even a genocide unfolding before our eyes. According to the United Nations, eight days ago, while on a mission to rescue their colleagues who had been shot at by Israeli forces earlier in the day, 15 Palestinian rescue workers were murdered by Israel one by one - that is a direct quote - and buried in a mass grave. That is the State of Israel. The reason it does what it does is because it does not face any consequences. The question again is, does the Minister intend to bring forward legislation that will ban the trade of both goods and services with the illegal Israeli settlements?

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The answer is the same: I intend to bring forward legislation as outlined in the programme for Government in relation to the occupied Palestinian territories. The substance of that legislation will be a matter for scrutiny, discussion and decision by this and the other House. My next step is to meet the Senator who is the sponsor of the original occupied territories Bill. We have been in contact and have arranged to do that next Tuesday, I believe. In addition to that, the EU level is also important because of EU competencies in trade, which we have been discussing in the context of other issues. We continue to work at an EU level with like-minded countries, including Spain, on the differentiation between the State of Israel and the illegal Israeli settlements as outlined by the ICJ.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To be clear, my question relates to the illegal Israeli settlements, so there is no need to make any distinction. The ICJ ruling is very clear. It prohibits the trade of goods and services with those illegal Israeli settlements. The programme for Government commitment specifies goods. Will services also be included in the ambition of the Bill? I ask the Minister for an answer to that question. If his answer is no, perhaps he will explain to the Dáil why not.

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am happy to discuss the content of the legislation when we publish it. I want to engage with the sponsor of the Bill. We have engaged in good faith. I think the Deputy was on the committee at the time when my predecessor, the now Taoiseach, was the Minister for Foreign Affairs. We have engaged in providing information. I want to take stock now of where that is at with the latest legal advice and opinions from my Department's legal people, the views of the Senator as the sponsor of the Bill and the commitment in the programme for Government. As I said to the Deputy's party spokesperson, I will update the House after I have had that meeting. I am happy to do so next week.

I accept the Deputy's question is about the Israeli settlements. The reason I make the point is because the position of this country is regularly misrepresented internationally. We differentiate clearly between the State of Israel and the illegal Israeli settlements as outlined by the ICJ advisory opinion. The other point is that we need to go at this in a parallel way. Of course, there are options available to this country which we are pursuing, as per the Deputy's question. There is also work that can be done at an EU level. This document was agreed by all 27 member state and recognises the difference between the State of Israel and the illegal Israeli settlements.