Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 5, subsection (1)(a ), line 36, after "Europol" to insert "on a case by case basis".

This amendment seeks to copperfasten the sovereignty of the police service and the defence of human rights standards in the State. Rather than saying we will respond to requests from Europol, we should say responses will be authorised on a case by case basis and limited to what is necessary. We should ensure appropriate safeguards and accountability mechanisms are in place before we respond in this way. We should protect and enshrine our own standards to ensure the sovereignty of our police service and policing practices. It is well documented that there are human rights abuses in EU member states and even if there were not, we should hardly consider it impossible that there might be such a scenario in the future. In that context, as a state, we should have a reasonable level of discretion and consider each case on its merits. On Committee Stage the Minister of State stated the provisions of section 7 ensured there was no obligation on the State to comply with any request. If that is the case, why is the amendment problematic?

Amendment No. 5 would have the same effect as amendment No. 2. However, whereas amendment No. 2 deals with requests for information, amendment No. 5 to section 7 deals with a request from Europol to initiate an investigation. The point to be made is that there is a need to ensure legislation will be human rights proofed and also the sovereignty of the police force here. These matters should be considered on a case by case basis and on their merits.