Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

30. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality if he is concerned at the chilling effect the proposed Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) (Amendment) Bill 2025 will have on freedom of speech; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36517/25]

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

65. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality if he will remove section 3 from the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) (Amendment) Bill 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36516/25]

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 30 and 65 together.

In Ireland, the right to freely and peacefully assemble and associate, and correspondingly, to freely express one’s convictions and opinions, is guaranteed under the Constitution, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. These are core tenets of any open, liberal democracy, and this Government is committed to their protection.

Notwithstanding that, there are boundaries to such protections, and as the nature of terrorism continues to evolve and adapt, we must ensure that our counter-terrorism laws are robust and fit for purpose in the face of modern terrorist threats. The Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) (Amendment) Bill 2025 seeks to achieve that aim. As the Deputy will be aware, the Bill transposes an EU Directive from 2017.Great care has been taken to ensure that where the offences introduced by the Bill place limits on fundamental rights, it is done proportionately and out of necessity. One such safeguard woven into the tapestry of this Bill is the notion of terrorist intention, which, in this jurisdiction, is an essential requirement for a person to fall within the scope of any of the offences.

Take section 3 of the Bill, which the Deputy specifically raises, by way of example. Section 3 widens the definition of the existing offence of “public provocation to commit a terrorist offence” to reflect that this may be committed through the glorification of a terrorist activity. A number of hurdles must be met for the prosecution of this offence. It will be necessary to prove that on distribution or publication of terrorist content, the person intended to incite another person to commit a terrorist activity. There must also be a reasonable apprehension that the commission of a terrorist activity could in fact result.This is a very high standard of proof intended as a safeguard to ensure that it is only people who set about to deliberately incite terrorist activity who could be charged with the offences contained in this Bill.