International Protection Bill 2026: Committee Stage (Resumed)
Seanad Éireann — 2026-03-19
============================================================

Jim O'Callaghan (FF), Dublin Bay South

I thank Senator McDowell for his amendment and thank colleagues for their contributions.
The first issue concerns the judgment in the case brought by Mr. A and Mr. J. I will not comment too much on that because I am appealing that judgment and anything I want to say will be said in the Court of Appeal rather than in the Houses of the Oireachtas. I need to respect the separation of powers. The only point I would make is that the basis for the Francovich damages claim in that case was based on decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union, CJEU. The other issue that was referred to by Senator Mullen was in respect of the ECHR, which obviously has a different thread and line of judgments.
The issue that arose at the Council of Europe, and which Ireland signed up to along with 26 other members of the Council of Europe including the United Kingdom, was in respect of the court's interpretation of Article 3 and, in particular, the definition of inhuman and degrading treatment. As was mentioned by Senator Stephenson, traditionally, the phrase "inhuman and degrading treatment" was used in cases such as that of the hooded men, which we all recall, where severe treatment was used against individuals who were being detained by the state. Indeed, Ireland won that case in the 1970s, not on the grounds of torture but on the grounds of inhuman and degrading treatment.
What prompted the proposed letter that was signed by Ireland and others was the new interpretation that has been applied by the ECHR in a small number of cases that gave a broader definition of inhuman and degrading treatment.
In particular, what prompted it was that a number of member states, not Ireland, had found difficulties in deporting individuals who had been convicted of serious criminal offences back to the countries from where they came, including countries in the Council of Europe. I do not have the names of the cases on me at present but there were three in particular. Some of the grounds relied upon included that the health service in the country to which the convicted person was to be returned would not provide the person with the same level of health treatment that they had received in the member state country. This included when it was a transfer back to a country within the Council of Europe.
I hear a bell, which I think means I have to shut up.

---

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/2026-03-19/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:45+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-03-19