Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister to the House. He is becoming the most frequent ministerial visitor and is bringing forward a substantial amount of legislation. I expected a ten to 15 minute contribution from Senator Denis O'Donovan and would have had time to pause, think and, perhaps, write but I have been left in the lurch by the Senator.

The Minister concluded his contribution with a reference to the Tobin case. I appreciate the sensitivity of the case and that it is on the road from a legal perspective. If the case was in reverse and we were seeking to pursue a case about a Hungarian citizen in Dublin we would be disappointed if no further action was necessary. While we must respect the decision of the Supreme Court it would be appropriate to extend our sympathy to the family in Hungary.

The Minister has provided a thorough trawl of the intricacies of the various pieces of legislation. Perhaps his most interesting comment, arising from his general unhappiness with the complexities and workings of the European arrest warrant system, is that he will bring forward a more substantial Bill and in a sense the Bill is an interim measure. Presumably, in this term of government we will hear his more substantial response. We are dealing with important legislation. We must recognise, in so far as the Minister and the House are concerned, this is a work in progress and not the finished work.

Any legislation dealing with extradition can be emotive. The issue has always been emotive in this and the other House. It is also complicated and detailed. In his contribution the Minister mentioned the rush to action which occurred after 11 September 2001. That is not only in respect of extradition law but societies and governments all over the western world were pressed into action and various laws, judicial and financial, were put in place as part of what became known as the war on terrorism. Much of it was necessary but some of it may have been over the top. A decade later we must begin to examine some of the legislation which, of necessity, was introduced in haste and rushed legislation is not always perfect.

European arrest warrants have served their purpose. We are debating the legislation with its European flavour while simultaneously other Ministers are liaising with the EU in respect of financial and banking matters. With the broader coming together of the EU as a political entity there is also the judicial side. Obviously the final version of the legislation will show where we stand in our relationship from a judicial point of view with our fellow EU governments and the additional opportunities which the Bill offers.

In examining extradition cases, we must ensure citizens are treated fairly and in a transparent fashion, that there is significant evidence and no rush to judgment. On the other side of the equation, notwithstanding that September 2001 is more than a decade ago, we must recognise that with each passing year and decade, new and more vicious forms of criminality, terrorism and threats not only to citizens but to states are occurring and there must be a robust response. The European arrest warrant is part of the necessary response and we must be supportive of it. In that regard, the Minister has given an indication that he has issues with the legislation put in place ten years ago and will reflect on it and present a more comprehensive Bill. I support the Minister's intention to progress the issue and to move on. I am sure it will be the majority view of the House that the legislation be approved.