Catherine Ardagh
Dublin South-Central · Fianna Fáil · Ireland
“Many Members here today know the real and lasting impact cancer has on individuals and families. It is something that touches almost every household in this country. It does not discriminate. The Bill is about fairness, dignity and giving cancer survivors the freedom to truly move on with their lives.”
“This is particularly in the case of child sexual abuse material investigations. An Garda Síochána regularly engages with its counterparts in other EU states and with international organisations, such as Interpol and Europol, in the fight against what are absolutely heinous crimes, as I think we can all agree.”
“A lot of investigations into child sexual abuse material may be referred from international partners, and it is imperative that gardaí have all the tools they require at their disposal to co-operate internationally in this field.”
“I take this opportunity to thank everyone here and acknowledge the constructive spirit in which Members have engaged with this Bill since 2022. There is a shared recognition across the Houses that this legislation will make a meaningful difference in people's lives, as described by Senator Nelson Murray.”
“The Government has now gone further than the voluntary code that is currently in place, reducing the relevant period from seven years to five years and increasing the sum-assured threshold from €500,000 to €650,000 to reflect the current housing market to support survivors to buy homes.”
“I thank Deputy Carthy for his support for this legislation. I also note the other issues he raised in relation to wider criminal justice and Garda issues. However, I will go back to discussing Deputy Kelly's amendment, tabled by Deputy Sheehan.”
The complete record
Every one of 423 lines we hold for Catherine Ardagh, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 9.
“It extends to anyone involved in the importation, distribution, cultivation, production or local sale and supply of controlled drugs. In relation to the issue of community safety, which was raised by Senator Andrews and other Members, the Government is committed to building stronger and safer communities, and strengthening An Garda Síochána is at the very core of this. However, community safety requires a broader approach. In April 2025, the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, approved the establishment of 36 local community safety partnerships within each local authority area. They will now make their own decisions as to their day-to-day activities operating in accordance with the statutory regulations and having regard to guidance from the National Office for Community Safety.”
“In relation to organised crime, the Department spent a record amount on budgetary measures. Over €2.74 billion was allocated in budget 2026 to An Garda Síochána and this enabled the Garda Commissioner to assign extra resources to specialist units involved in tackling organised crime. These include the Garda National Drugs and Organised Crime Bureau, the Garda National Bureau of Criminal Investigation and the armed support unit, as well as more resources for the Criminal Assets Bureau. An Garda Síochána continues to implement an enhanced national anti-drugs strategy through Operation Tara. The focus of this operation is to disrupt, dismantle and prosecute drug trafficking networks at all levels: international, national and local.”
“This was also raised in the minority report in relation to examining what measures, short of non-jury trial, can be taken to protect jurors. As I noted, the Department is currently undertaking a review of jury service. The review is informed by recent research on the topic, the Law Reform Commission's report on jury service and the legislative and policy developments in related areas over the past number of years. These include amendments to the Juries Act contained in the assisted decision-making capacity legislation, work by the Courts Service to centralise the jury summons process and the roll-out of an online platform to allow people to practically respond to jury summonses, which can be quite stressful for people who are not used to receiving such summonses.”
“The threats that the State faces today from paramilitaries have reduced and altered while, as Senator Kelleher said, other threats have increased. These changes should prompt a change of policy while also recognising that replacement legislation must maintain the legislative basis for an effective State capacity to deal with terrorism and organised crime on an ongoing basis, as well as being compliant with human rights and the rule of law. I agree with the report of the majority that any deviation from jury trial for indictable offences must be exceptional and based on the constitutional tests as set out in Article 38.3, and must have appropriate legislative safeguards in accordance with the Constitution. Senator Andrews raised the issue of the protection of jurors and I note the recommendations in the report in relation this.”
“Those people expect us to ensure that our criminal justice system has the tools necessary to tackle serious criminality and protect the public. The motion before the House today very much does that. I will refer to some of the issues raised by my colleagues, particularly in relation to the review of the independent report. This was outlined by Senators Gallagher, Kelleher and Andrews. As noted earlier, the Minister has accepted in principle the recommendations of the majority report and the proposals are being developed on that basis. The majority put forward a package of proposals on a modern legal framework to replace the Offences Against the State Acts and provide a new, stricter system overall with more checks and balances. They also recognise the need for such legislation to be subject to regular and meaningful independent oversight.”
“I thank all Senators who contributed today. I am grateful for their contributions, particularly those who spoke in favour, and there was also important discourse from those who did not. Every Senator in this House knows the appalling damage caused by organised crime, as outlined by Senator Andrews and others, particularly the damage caused by the drugs trade to individual families and communities. As a public representative, and now as Minister of State at the Department of justice, I have seen first hand the impact that organised crime can have on families and communities. Too often, it is ordinary people who bear the consequences - parents worried about their children, victims living with intimidation and communities striving to provide better opportunities for young people.”
“The views of An Garda Síochána are clearly set out in the report, and they are that the continued operation of these provisions is required. In the meantime, as set out in the two reports laid before the House, it is the clear view of An Garda Síochána that the provisions of the 1998 and 2009 Acts continue to be necessary and effective in ongoing efforts in the fight against terrorism and serious organised crime. On the basis of the information set out in the reports and on the advice of the Garda authorities, I propose that the House should approve the continued operation of the relevant provisions of the 1998 and 2009 Acts for a further 12 months, commencing on 30 June 2026.”
“The strategy notes the changed security environment and evolving geopolitical landscape, where the links between the EU’s internal and external security require more action against the range of threats faced, including hybrid threats by hostile foreign states and state-sponsored actors, powerful organised crime networks, the ongoing threat faced from terrorism, technological advancements and more. Ireland is not immune from the threats arising in this changed security environment and must have the capability to deal with the threats arising. Building on ProtectEU, in February 2026 the EU published its agenda to prevent and counter terrorism and online extremism, which reinforces Europe's collective response to evolving terrorist and violent extremist threats.”
“There has generally been a deterioration in the international security landscape in recent times, in part due to the terrible wars in Ukraine and in the Middle East. Europol, in its most recent terrorism situation and trend report (2025), sets out the threat situation at EU level. The report confirms that terrorism, particularly jihadist and lone actor attacks, remains a key threat to the EU’s internal security. Last year, the EU published its internal security strategy, ProtectEU.”
“In that regard, I am firmly of the view that the provisions I am seeking renewal of today are necessary to support An Garda Síochána in investigating, disrupting and dismantling the activities of terrorists. In addition to providing information on the use of the provisions in question over the past year, the report laid before this House notes the clear view of the Garda Commissioner that the Act continues to be an important tool in ongoing efforts to combat terrorism. While the 1998 Act was a response to a domestic threat arising from dissident republican terrorism, as an open democracy it is very important that we do not lose sight of the threat from violent extremism and international terrorism.”
“Co-operation between gardaí and their counterparts in Northern Ireland is strong. Indeed, it is automatic when needed most. In recent years, the benefits of that co-operation have been apparent from successful joint operations between An Garda Síochána and the PSNI. The joint Cross Border Policing Strategy 2025-2027 provides a platform for An Garda Síochána and the PSNI to build on existing strategic and operational collaboration and strengthen policing capacity and capability. I pay tribute to the gardaí and PSNI officers who continue to co-operate closely and work tirelessly together to keep their communities safe and to counter all threats from terrorism. It is our duty to ensure that those tasked with protecting us from this threat have at their disposal the appropriate measures to meet it.”
“It is clear that so called dissident republicans, who have their origins in the Provisional IRA and INLA, continue to represent a threat. Despite the progress towards peace made over the years, they continue to seek to return to the fruitless violence of the past, as evidenced by two recent attempted attacks on police stations in Lurgan, County Armagh and Dunmurry, just outside Belfast. These groups have remained resolute in their opposition to democracy and rule of law and all that the Good Friday Agreement stands for, and they remain wedded to brutality and criminality. It is well established that they have links to and operate hand in hand with organised criminals. There is no cause for complacency in countering the threat posed by these organisations. North-South co-operation in this area is crucial.”
“This was a necessary and proportionate response to an atrocious and barbaric act and the murder of 29 innocent people by the Real IRA. These provisions of the criminal law provide strong legislative powers to ensure that the Garda and the courts are in a position to meet the challenge laid down by those opponents of peace. Section 18 of the 1998 Act provides that sections 2 to 4, 6 to 12, 14 and 17 must be renewed by the Oireachtas at least annually if they are to remain in force. The report laid before this House includes information provided by the Garda Commissioner on the use of the provisions in question over the past 12 months and a table setting out usage figures for each of the years since the Act came into operation.”
“The two motions before the House seek the approval of Seanad Éireann to continue in force provisions in the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 and the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009 aimed at combating terrorism and organised crime. Given the nature of these important provisions, the Houses of the Oireachtas has decided that they should be periodically reviewed. The Minister for Justice, Home Affairs, and Migration, is required to lay reports before the Oireachtas on the use of the relevant provisions in the two Acts, and reports covering the 12 months up to 31 May 2026 were placed in the Oireachtas Library on 19 June. Senators will be aware that the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 was enacted in the aftermath of the Omagh bombing in August 1998.”
“This legislation, in tandem with other measures, will help to ensure we are sufficiently prepared to meet the ever-evolving challenge of modern terrorism. I thank Senators from across the House for their contributions and support on the introduction of this Bill to the House. I look forward to their support as the Bill is further considered on Committee Stage.”
“Terrorists are increasingly leveraging, as we have discussed at length in this House, new technologies to intimidate, radicalise, recruit and carry out terrorist attacks. The Bill will address part of this dangerous trend. It clarifies that the dissemination of messages that glorify terrorist acts, done in such a way as to provoke further terrorist acts, is an offence. It also allows for the categorisation of cyber offences already on our Statute Book as terrorist offences. The latter is a necessary step for the protection of our critical infrastructure from terrorist cyberattack. Both of these measures are complementary to existing provisions aimed at tackling the digital dimension of terrorism, including the power of An Garda Síochána to order online platforms to remove terrorist content.”
“The 2005 Act, which this Bill updates, excludes the activities of armed forces during an armed conflict and in the exercise of their official duties from being categorised as terrorist offences insofar as those acts are governed by humanitarian or other rules of international law. This was a requirement of the original EU measure underpinning the legislation, a 2002 EU Council framework decision on combating terrorism. That requirement remains in the 2017 directive that will underpin the primary Act on foot of the Bill. The aim of the Bill is to give full effect to the 2017 EU directive on combating terrorism. Therefore, these proposed offences will fall outside the scope of the Bill.”
“The Minister rejected proposals from the Opposition in the Dáil to codify as terrorist offences certain acts of state forces engaged in war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. The acts were travelling, organising travel, recruitment and training for the purposes of serving with such forces. It is understood the intention behind the amendments was to ensure those who participate in or facilitate acts that contribute to breaches of international law, including war crimes, crimes against humanity and acts of genocide at the behest of a state via its armed forces can be convicted of terrorist offences.”
“It must be shown the person possessed the intention of inciting persons to commit a terrorist activity when he or she distributed, published or caused to be distributed or published a message inciting or glorifying, including by praise or celebration, a terrorist activity. It is also a requirement of the offence that such distribution or publication gave rise to the reasonable apprehension that the commission of a terrorist activity could thereby result. These additional elements act as safeguards in ensuring it only applies to those who deliberately incite terrorist activity and only where it is reasonable to believe a terrorist activity would result. That is what is captured by this offence. Senator Murphy noted Sinn Féin amendments in the Dáil.”
“There is a marked difference between the two statutory provisions in question, namely, what we propose in section 3 of the Bill to reformulate the definition of a public provocation offence and what exists under section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000 in England and Wales. Under the legislation in England and Wales, there is no requirement for a person's acts or behaviour to carry with them the intention of causing committal of a terrorist offence. It is much broader, simply requiring that in a public place a person wears or displays an article that would arouse suspicion that the person is a supporter of a proscribed organisation. Contrast that with section 3 of this Bill, which carries a much higher burden of proof to bring about a successful prosecution for public provocation to commit a terrorist offence by glorification.”
“The high standard of proof contained within the reframed definition ensures a person's fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression and association, are protected and situations do not arise whereby otherwise lawful activities are considered as falling within the scope of this offence. Senators Murphy and Keogan raised concerns around the Kneecap clause. As the definition of "public provocation" has been expanded in the Bill, there might be a possibility it could be open to abuse and misuse by curtailing free speech and lead to prosecutions similar to those in the UK in relation to the band Kneecap, which came to all our attention. The Bill does not contain provisions in any way reflective of the charges faced by a member of Kneecap.”
“The use of a reasonableness test is an objective-level standard used in law to prevent against arbitrary or irrational interpretation, assessing circumstances against a hypothetical reasonable person's response or actions. These ingredients sound complex, but they are not; they are standard phrases in law. These ingredients serve to act as safeguards, ensuring that it is only those who set out to deliberately incite terrorist activity, where it is reasonable to assume a terrorist activity, as defined in the Bill, would result, are captured by this offence.”
“That is why the new expanded definition of the offence of public provocation to commit a terrorist offence contains several ingredients that must first be present in order for a person to be guilty of glorification of a terrorist activity under the provisions of section 3 of the Bill. It must be shown that he or she possessed the requisite intention of inciting persons to commit a terrorist activity when he or she distributed, published or had caused to be distributed or published a message. The message itself must have glorified, including by praise or celebration, a terrorist activity. The publication of the message must give rise to a reasonable apprehension that someone might, as a result of such a publication, commit a terrorist act, which is obviously an objective test.”
“Those who engage in legitimate reporting on terrorist acts, criticism or other forms of legitimate expression should not, in our modern, liberal democracy, fear they might be captured by the scope of this offence. The offence of public provocation to commit a terrorist act seeks to target those who glorify and justify terrorism, or who disseminate messages or images online and offline, including those related to the victims of terrorism, as a way to gather support for terrorist causes or seriously intimidate the population, particularly where such dissemination causes a reasonable prospect that terrorist acts may be committed.”
“As previously stated, the Bill will give effect to provisions of the 2017 EU directive on combating terrorism. This is an important step in bringing our domestic counterterrorism laws further into alignment with that of other EU member states and will aid in international co-operation to address the security threat. I note various comments made by Senators Murphy, Keogan and O'Reilly, who raised serious concerns regarding glorification of terrorism and the definition of provocation as an offence. In Ireland, the right to freely express one's convictions and opinions is protected under the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.”
“Ireland has put in place strong anti-terrorist legislation to ensure that terrorist activities will not be tolerated here, while at the same time ensuring the safety and protection of fundamental freedoms and rights for all. The Bill before the House will further discuss this ongoing threat by creating new terrorist offences relating to travel and training for the purposes of terrorism. These provisions are of critical importance in denying international terrorists the means and opportunity to use this jurisdiction for planning and supporting terrorist activities. International co-operation, particularly with EU partners, is essential in our efforts to combat terrorism. This is especially the case given the cross-border nature of many terrorist threats and the scope of the offences.”
“I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach for that. I listened with interest from my office to the comments on this Bill, and I thank all Members who contributed to the debate. It is very encouraging to see the level of support across the House and the goodwill towards the legislation, albeit with some comments from Members of the House. It is undeniable that the landscape of terror threats in Europe has shifted in recent years, yet terrorism and violent extremism continue to pose a persistent and multifaceted threat. These are complex threats from across the entire ideological spectrum, often driven by geopolitical tensions and frequently accelerated by digital connectivity. Whatever their provenance, acts of terrorism constitute a serious attack on democracy, the rule of law and the enjoyment of human rights.”
“I move: That Dáil Éireann resolves that section 8 of the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009 (No. 32 of 2009) shall continue in operation for the period beginning on 30th June, 2026 and ending on 29th June, 2027.”
“I know Deputy Carthy raised the issue of Sallins. The establishment of a public inquiry is something we can only proceed with in accordance with the legislation governing inquiries. The most important requirement is that the matter be of urgent public importance requiring investigation. In light of developments since 1976, the Minister is satisfied that it is not warranted.”
“The overall Garda workforce increased from 15,908 in 2016 to over 18,000 as of April. Deputy Collins and others raised Garda resources. Over the previous few years, the focus has been on ramping up funding to provide the equipment, technology and facilities and fleet personnel for An Garda Síochána so that it can keep our communities safe. The Government is committed to building stronger, safer communities. At the heart of this debate, it is about protecting the public, supporting the rule of law and ensuring that those who seek to undermine our democracy and communities are met with a firm and effective response to the State. I commend the motions to the House. A Cheann Comhairle, could I get back to Deputy Carthy on Sallins?”
“In relation to a point raised by Deputy Paul Murphy on the minority report, while not endorsing the recommendation of the majority for a standing non-jury court, the minority report did accept that recourse to a non-jury court may be warranted in the interests of justice where there is a real and present danger of jury intimidation. Many Members, including Deputies Gannon, Gibney and Rice, raised the issues of the jury. I note the recommendations of the majority and also the minority in relation to examining the measures, short of non-jury trial, that can be taken to protect jurors. This is in both the reports. In relation to Garda recruitment, the Government is committed to building stronger, safer communities and strengthening An Garda Síochána, and very much supporting An Garda Síochána in that regard.”
“Part V of the Offences Against the State Act 1939 provides for the establishment of the Special Criminal Court, and the legislation is clear that the Government was entitled to make a proclamation providing for the establishment of the court whenever it was necessary to do so. There is no provision in statute whereby such courts can only be of a limited duration, nor is there any sunset clause providing that the court only last any particular time. The Offences Against the State Acts are not emergency laws. They are complementary to our general criminal law and apply only in the most serious of cases.”
“The record budgetary resources of over €2.74 billion in budget 2025 allocated to An Garda Síochána have enabled the Garda Commissioner to assign extra resources to the specialist units involved in tackling organised crime. These include the Garda National Drugs and Organised Crime Bureau, the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation, the armed support unit and the Criminal Assets Bureau. In relation to an explanation as to why we have this temporary legislation today, first, as we know, the Special Criminal Court is provided for in our Constitution. We have to remember that.”
“That section provides that in proceedings concerned with the offence of membership of an unlawful organisation, it is permitted for inferences to be drawn by an accused's failure to answer any question material to the offence. It is important to note that inferences may be treated as corroboration of any evidence in relation to the offence, but a person cannot be convicted solely on the basis of inferences. The majority recommended that this provision be re-enacted in any legislation that replaces the Offences Against the State Acts, with the additional safeguard that provision be made in legislation to the effect that an inference drawn under this section should not be capable of providing the sole corroboration for belief evidence. Many Members, including Deputy Carthy, raised the issue of our response to organised crime.”
“The rules of evidence that apply in proceedings before the Special Criminal Court are the same as those applicable in trials in the Central Criminal Court. Anyone tried before the Special Criminal Court has a full range of procedural protections available to them, including appeals to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. Deputy Coppinger raised the issue of belief evidence. I want to clarify that belief evidence, which is permissible in trials for membership of an unlawful organisation by virtue of section 3(2) of the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act 1972, is not one of the provisions for renewal today. Rather, I am seeking the renewal of section 2 of the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act.”
“While jury trial is commonplace here, and is our very much preferred approach, it is not at all commonplace in the criminal justice systems of many other European states, for example, Sweden and Norway. The Special Criminal Court operates without a jury for sound reasons. Trials are heard there by three judges rather than one. The issuing of a reasoned judgment, which obviously would not be available in a jury trial, is one of the benefits of the Special Criminal Court and provides a basis for analysis and for parties to appeal a ruling should they wish to do so. While those judgments have always been available to the parties to the case, I welcome the plans of the Courts Service to facilitate their publication, should a judge so decide in a given case.”
“In that regard, I note that the DPP has placed more information into to the public domain on how that decision-making process currently operates, for the purpose of transparency. The report laid also provides a brief assessment of the security situation. I should caution, however, that there are clear constraints on the detail of what is and can be reported, to ensure there is no longer a danger of prejudice to the investigation or prosecution of crime or the security of the State. Deputy Paul Murphy raised issues in relation to fundamental human rights, as did Deputy Coppinger. Some argue that non-jury courts are contrary to fundamental rights of persons before the law and international principles of administration of justice. I respectfully disagree with that analysis.”
“Clearly the review group recommended on the basis of the best information available to it that there is, and will continue to be, an ongoing need for a non-jury court, as permitted by the Constitution, to try serious criminal offences in certain limited and exceptional circumstances where the ordinary courts are inadequate to secure the effective administration of justice and the preservation of public peace and order. It is up to the DPP in any individual case to direct that a trial take place before the Special Criminal Court. That decision is subject to careful consideration on the facts and circumstances of the case. I am conscious of the recommendation for more transparency around the court and the procedure in particular.”
“While work on proposals to replace the Offences Against the State Act is well under way, the threat from terrorism and organised crime very much remains. The renewal of these provisions is necessary today to combat this threat. Many Members raised the issue of lack of information, asking why the ordinary courts are not sufficient. This was raised, in particular, by the Labour Party and Deputies Gibney and Gannon from the Social Democrats.”
“The Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) (Amendment) Bill will address the foreign terrorist fighter phenomenon, which includes offences of travelling to commit a terrorist offence or organising or facilitating travel to commit a terrorist offence, and receiving training for terrorism. The Garda Síochána (Powers) Bill and the Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) (Amendment) Bill are before the Houses. The Criminal Law, Civil Law and Defence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill will confirm that legal authority of An Garda Síochána to deploy radio frequency jammers for counter-unmanned aircraft systems purposes, where necessary to carry out its policing functions. I refer also to other civil security-related legislation.”
“It was after completing and considering this extensive consultation that the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, notified the Government that he accepts in principle the recommendations of the majority report. This sets a clear direction for reform. However, given the importance of the Acts over many decades, detailed proposals for reform must be thoroughly considered and approached with the utmost of case. These considerations, as we know, take time and the Minister intends to return to Government with detailed proposals in due course. There is, as we know, significant legislative work under way to bolster our national security, with four Bills currently in the Houses.”
“The main recommendations of the majority report can be summarised as follows: repeal of the Offences against the State Act, with select elements reflective of current or potential threats being re-enacted in replacement legislation; establishing a new standing non-jury court to replace the Special Criminal Court to try serious criminal offences where the ordinary courts are inadequate; and consideration to be given to consolidation of all legislation dealing with terrorist offences. A lot of Deputies raised the issue of the timeline of the implementation of the majority report. I can say that my Department has engaged in consultation on the recommendations of the review group and it has examined the reports from a variety of perspectives, including policing, governance and legislation.”
“I am very grateful to the House for its consideration of these motions. I thank Deputies for their contributions, particularly those in support but also those who do not support the motion because their discourse is very important. Many issues have been raised. I know I have only eight minutes. For the benefit of the House and for those watching, the independent review group carried out a comprehensive review of the law in this area and the majority and minority reports of the group were published in June 2023.”
“In the meantime, and in conclusion, as set out in the two reports laid before the House, it is the clear view of An Garda Síochána that the provisions in the 1998 Act and the 2009 Act continue to be necessary and effective in ongoing efforts in the fight against terrorism and serious organised crime. On the basis of the information set out in those reports, and on the advice of the Garda authorities, I propose that the House should approve the continued operation of the relevant provisions of the 1998 Act and the 2009 Act for a further 12 months, commencing on 30 June 2026.”
“Indeed, the vast majority of scheduled offences continue to be dealt with in the ordinary courts and the DPP on her website has set out very clearly the decision-making process involved where An Garda Síochána recommends that a case be tried in the Special Criminal Court. Last year, the Minister informed the Government that he accepted, in principle, the recommendations of the majority report. Accepting the recommendations of the majority report sets a clear direction for reform. Proposals for new legislation are currently under development and the Minister will return to the Government in due course with these.”
“The Special Criminal Court was established to respond to the threat to the State and its people from republican terrorism over the decades and it continues to deal with the threat posed by terrorism and the most serious organised crime cases. It serves to eliminate the very real risk to jurors and potential jurors by subversives and ruthless crime groups who place no value on human life. While it is, of course, my firm view that trial by jury should be preserved to the greatest extent possible, I have a responsibility not to ignore the threat posed by such groups. I highlight the fact that, in accordance with that principle, the Special Criminal Court is only used in very limited circumstances. I am informed that there were 18 defendants brought before the Special Criminal Court last year on 104 charges.”
“As part of this, the assessment of the majority of the review group was that there is, and will continue to be, an ongoing need for a non-jury court as permitted by the Constitution to try serious criminal offences in certain limited and exceptional circumstances. I take seriously that assessment in the context of safeguarding the security of the State and our citizens. The majority also devised a suite of proposals in relation to how the court might operate to uphold the rights of accused persons and to support transparency and maintain public confidence. I and the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration are firmly of the view that the Offences Against the State Acts have served our country well in combating both subversives and organised crime and have fulfilled a vital role in our criminal justice system.”
“One of these was laid before the Special Criminal Court and three convictions were recorded during the reporting period. The view of An Garda Síochána is clearly set out in the report and it is that the continued operation of this provision is required. It is my strong view, and the strong view of the Minister, that section 8 should be continued in operation for a further 12 months. The House will be aware that the majority and minority reports of the independent review group were published in June 2023. The majority recommended the repeal of the Acts and their replacement with modern bespoke legislation.”
“Deputies will also be aware of significant cases in which individuals have been convicted and sentenced in the Special Criminal Court in recent weeks. I acknowledge this important work and the brave gardaí who persevere with it, day in, day out. The report that the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, has laid before the House in accordance with section 8 covers the period from 1 June 2025 to 31 May 2026. It includes information provided by the Garda Commissioner on the use over the past 12 months of the provisions in question and details the relevant offences. It is clear from the report that An Garda Síochána made a significant number of arrests in respect of the offences relevant to section 8 of the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009, with 33 charges laid before the courts.”
“This is reflected in the record allocation of over €2.59 billion in budget 2026, which allows for sustained investment in recruitment, equipment, technology and vehicles. An Garda Síochána is working intensively to bear down on the criminals involved and deserves praise for its considerable successes in disrupting their activities, in making significant seizures of drugs, cash, and weapons, in bringing criminals to justice, and, most importantly, in preventing further loss of life. I draw attention to a joint task force operation in April between An Garda Síochána and the PSNI, resulting in €5.2 million of drugs seized in Larne Harbour, and a joint An Garda Síochána operation with Revenue which seized €10.5 million in cocaine at Rosslare Harbour in October 2025.”