Frank Fahey (Galway West, Fianna Fail)

Senator Cummins proposed the amendment on Committee Stage, as he stated, and the Tánaiste referred to the difficulties which might arise with the legal interpretation of footnotes in the event of a challenge to the provision in question. The Parliamentary Counsel recommends, therefore, that the generally accepted practice of not accepting amendments that include explanatory footnotes be adhered to. The application of the principle of ne bis in idem relating to persons who may be tried for crimes under Articles 6, 7 or 8 of the Statute of Rome and may subsequently be convicted or acquitted is set out clearly and concisely in Article 20 of the Statute of Rome. The statute in its entirety is attached as a Schedule to this Bill. In addition, section 3 specifically provides for judicial notice to be taken of the statute. It is important that we stick to the wording of the Statute of Rome, the international instrument on which the Bill is based.

It should also be borne in mind that in interpreting the Act and the Statute of Rome, section 3 states a court may, among other things, consider the travaux preparatoires, in effect the explanatory memoranda, relating to the provisions of the Statute of Rome and to give them the weight the court may consider appropriate. It is unlikely, therefore, that in the event of an interpretation of the term ne bis in idem arising, there will be any doubt as to the meaning of the term as set out in Article 20 of the statute. Consequently, I cannot accept the amendment.