John Dardis (Progressive Democrats)

There are other aspects. My own town of Newbridge has benefitted from the presence of the Defence Forces at civil level and the town has enhanced the lives of the members.

We have unique qualities that have been beneficial in our United Nations service. I was in the Gaza Strip and observed the work of some of our personnel and saw that can bridge the divides that more powerful countries cannot, an important aspect of the work of the Defence Forces. I would like to see them play a full role in the European context and I welcome the rapid reaction force. I hope we will contribute fully to our obligations within that context.

High standards are required and that is why military law differs from civil law in what it asks of members of the forces. I agree with Senator Mooney, however, that it is appalling that people were taken out and shot because they were shell-shocked. If a sentry falls asleep and his comrades lives are put at risk it is a serious matter but execution is not the way forward.

The Minister mentioned service abroad and the civil law, as covered in sections 14 and 42 of the Bill. If someone serving in the Army with the United Nations committed an offence such as murder in an Islamic country where it is a capital crime, what would happen? Even though the person has committed a heinous crime, we must protect his life. When would we not hand someone over to the civil authorities in the state where the crime was committed? This is a fraught area that we must address.

There are different standards in peacetime and in time of war. What happens in a peacetime situation would warrant a lesser penalty than a similar offence in a wartime situation. When I was growing up in Newbridge, the main offence before courts martial was bicycle theft, which was a result of personnel from the Curragh going to local pubs and then being unable to get home late at night — they would steal a bicycle from outside a shop to get back. I often wondered why they did not stay in the messes where the drink was much cheaper but then I remembered the lack of women in there.

I welcome the provisions on time limits, administration, the independent authority and an independent military judicial officer. They clean up many of the areas that needed to be examined. The Bill has done a good day's work in that regard.

Where the summary court martial operates, the subject of the court martial must make the election. That is how it should be. There should also be a system of appeal. The worst situation could arise where the immediate line commanders or commanding officers of those charged are the judge and jury. It is to the Bill's benefit that will not happen unless someone elects for the summary court martial to be dealt with by the commanding officer. The two-thirds majority in coming to a decision is also important. That independence for those adjudicating the court martial, so they are at a remove from the subject, will prevent cases like those in the past where direct prejudice and animosity resulted in defective judgments, something we must strive to avoid. It is very important that judgments of the European Court of Human Rights are taken into account. We are somewhat casual in Ireland about the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the ECHR's judgments. Before Christmas, I visited Austria, where a strong line is taken on implementing the ECHR's judgments in domestic law. I am glad the Bill takes a similar line and am happy to lend it my support.