Garda Síochána (Powers) Bill 2026: Second Stage
Seanad Éireann — 2026-02-04
============================================================

Victor Boyhan (IND), Agricultural Panel

I welcome the Minister and thank him for coming before us today to debate the Garda Síochána (Powers) Bill 2026.
As the Minister said in his opening statement, it has been a long time coming, but it is here and before us now.
In general, I welcome this Bill. I generally support it, but I think there are some concerns. At the very outset, I draw the Minister’s attention to the Bill digest for this legislation. I do not know if the Minister has one to hand, but if not, I will leave one outside. I took up one, because when I referred to these digests previously, Ministers have told me they do not actually get them. They are usually provided to the Members. Needless to say, the Minister’s party has loads of Members in both Houses but I have taken the liberty of copying one off for him with the relevant links. I think it is really important, and I think Ministers can learn a lot from this sort of independent research that is validated through the Oireachtas Library and Research Service to assist us in our parliamentary work. It is a really positive statement. I acknowledge that first.
I also want to acknowledge the engagement of the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, ICCL, of which I am a fan. I do not always agree with what it has to say but it is important. It has taken the time to engage with Oireachtas Members, has written to us and spelled out some concerns and that is important too.
To reiterate what we are talking about, the purpose of this legislation is, of course, as the Minister said, "to provide a modern, clear and comprehensive statutory framework for Garda stop-and-search powers and the execution of search warrants". It is also concerned with ensuring that the statutory framework is coherent, consistent and responsive to the ever evolving operational and legal requirements for An Garda Síochána in the enforcement of the law. As the Minister has said himself, by providing an updated framework, the Bill seeks a balance in terms of operational effectiveness and the protection of individual rights and the underpinning of public confidence, which is critically important.
It is ironic that we are talking about this Bill this week when there are other issues about An Garda Síochána. I support An Garda Síochána. I wish to state clearly that its members have an exceptionally difficult job in administering the law and keeping and maintaining that confidence in policing. I salute them for the work they have done. There are challenges, though, and people can do better. We must never bury our heads in the sand and suggest otherwise.
This is a wide-ranging Bill, as the Minister said, but it is covering those issues I talked about. I was pleasantly surprised to see in the correspondence from the ICCL that I read yesterday that it welcomes the return of this Bill to the Seanad. However, it raises issues in terms of human rights safeguards. It refers to human rights having been removed from the Bill. The ICCL says this is a regressive step considering that the impetus for this Bill was the final report from the Commission on the Future of Policing, with which the Minister will be very familiar, the paramount recommendation of which was that human rights be at the centre of policing. One has to ask the question as to why this appears to be watered down and not included in the Bill. The Minister might deal with that later.
The ICCL also makes the case for the provision of the protection of fundamental rights and the protection of children’s rights. The group's recommendation is that the protection of the rights of persons with impaired capacity should be reinserted. I ask that the Minister would at least look at it. I know he is open to considering matters. He does take the engagement and dialogue in the Senate seriously, so I want to flag these as pointers for him to things I think should be dealt with.
On the stop-and-search data, the ICCL suggests section 13 be amended to allow for records of Garda powers to stop and search under sections 8, 9 and 10. I ask the Minister to please consider this.
Turning to definitions regarding different types of searches, in Part 2, the provision relating to search needs to provide clarity on the different types of searches, as there are no definitions in terms of “strip”, “cavity” or “intimate” searches in this Bill. Definitions should be inserted into the Bill, and I think that makes sense. As a practising barrister and an expert in law, I think the Minister could see the logic that a definition be inserted into the Bill for clarity and to complement what is already in the custody regulations. I think there is an issue around that.
Moving to practice examples in other jurisdictions, we need to look at Scotland and at England and Wales. There are different regimes there. Go to the international scene within Europe, and there are different definitions in relation to “strip”, “cavity” and “intimate” searches, reflecting significant aspects of emphasis, nuance and difference in relation to this area. We are talking about the personal encroachment on people’s fundamental rights. We have got to get the balance right. I am not on for being all softly, softly, but this is important. I am consistent about human rights. If you are a defender of human rights, then you must be consistent in everything you say in these Houses in terms of legislation. I ask that the Minister would look at this concern.
The ICCL also stated that each is potentially justifiable in certain circumstances, so it is not saying it is not justified. The group says each is potentially justifiable in certain contexts, but that there should be legal definitions for these levels of searches. I think that is a fair comment from the ICCL. It is not a blanket “No”. It is saying there are justifiable reasons in certain circumstances and I ask the Minister to take this on board.
On the power of the Garda to search electronic devices, and the Minister will be aware of this, section 19 widens the legal framework for the Garda to search electronic devices and information systems. I understand the need for this to happen. The Minister has clearly set it out and all of us in this Chamber understand those needs. However, it is important that they are cautiously welcomed because of the changes in the provisions since the general scheme of the Bill, because it has varied since the initial general scheme. It is also noted that such searches are only permitted under search warrants following assessment of necessity and proportionality by a judge of the court. The ICCL makes the case that under section 19(1)(f)(i) regarding the power of the Garda to compel someone to provide a password, a PIN code, biometric data or other information necessary to access the electronic device, this should only be exercised under a search warrant. That is the request there, that it only be exercised under a search warrant.
Regarding journalistic privilege, and I am coming to the end of my commentary, the Bill outlines a new framework for how the Garda can search journalistic material. In the Bill’s current form, warrants that will allow the Garda to search a journalist's material will be decided at an ex parte hearing where only a judge is present. In Northern Ireland, such decisions are made in inter partes hearings where journalists and their legal counsel are present to make arguments for the protection of journalists’ privilege. I firmly believe that the Bill should be amended to require inter partes hearings for warranted applications to ensure adequate protection for journalistic privilege and to align with the relevant case law. This is very important. I believe that journalists and journalism are important components of democracy. They report every day on what we do here, so I think this is really important. The Minister, I and every politician in these Houses understands the responsible role of journalism in shining a light and providing greater transparency on how we do our business. How we are prepared to support journalists is a critically important element of this Bill and it is one of the biggest issues for me.
I welcome this Bill generally. I am broadly supportive of it. I think, though, that I have raised some points that warrant further examination by the Minister.

---

Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted.

Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-02-04/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:35+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-02-04