John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 198: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the levels of success to date with international ratification of the Rome Statute; if he will report on Ireland's work in this regard and on general progression towards international agreement on the International Criminal Court; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13709/05]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A total of 139 states have signed the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. To date, 98 states have become parties to the statute. Together with our partners in the European Union, Ireland has been a consistent and strong supporter of the ICC, recognising it as an essential means of combating impunity for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community. This position has been recognised in the EU common position of 2001, amended in 2002, and comprehensively updated in June 2003.

The 2003 common position commits the Union and its member states to support the effective functioning of the court and to advance universal support for it by promoting the widest possible participation in the Rome Statute. In February 2004, a detailed action plan on the implementation of the 2003 common position was adopted under the auspices of the Irish Presidency of the European Union. During its EU Presidency, Ireland took a very active role in implementing the action plan, including raising it in EU political dialogue with third countries by making démarches encouraging support for the court in various capitals and in liaising with the court itself.

In addition, the EU and its member states have been generous supporters of initiatives to promote the court in third states, as well as to strengthen the capacity of states to co-operate with the court. In this context, during its EU Presidency, Ireland organised an ICC event for representatives of small island developing states in New York and co-sponsored an international conference on human rights and the ICC in Sana'a, Yemen. Ireland also provided funds towards a conference entitled "The ICC and the Arab World" which took place in Jordan in February 2005 and it is intended to provide funding to other such initiatives in support of the court in the course of this year. I assure Deputies of Ireland's continued interest in and support for the court as an essential means of combating impunity for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 199: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the level of implementation of the provisions of the biological and toxins weapons convention; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13710/05]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction, often referred to as the biological and toxin weapons convention, BTWC, was opened for signature on 10 April 1972 and entered into force on 26 March 1975. Ireland is a state party to the convention.

Ireland has legislation currently in place that regulates the use of biological materials in conformity with the provisions of the convention. This legislation includes the Control of Exports Act 1983, the Control of Exports Order 2000, the Importation of Pathogenic Agents Order 1997 and the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (Biological Agents) Regulations 1994, as amended in 1998. In addition, the export of biological toxins is covered by European Community dual-use export legislation and domestic law which controls the export of military goods.

The issue of national implementation of the BTWC forms part of the current BTWC programme of work, which will conclude at the 2006 review conference of the BTWC. It was decided at the 2003 meeting of state parties that state parties should, where necessary, enact or update national legal measures.

In line with this programme of work, this Department has recently examined whether the existing legislation has the effect of satisfying all requirements of the convention. Our conclusion is that some further legislative action may be required to fully meet the provisions of Article IV of the convention, which requires states parties of the convention to take "any necessary measures to prohibit and prevent the development, production, stockpiling, acquisition, or retention of the agents, toxins, weapons, equipment and means of delivery specified in Article I of the Convention, within the territory of such State, under its jurisdiction or under its control anywhere". Consultations with the relevant Departments have been initiated with a view to identifying the appropriate Department to sponsor such legislation.