International Co-operation (Omagh Bombing Inquiry) Bill 2026: Second Stage
Seanad Éireann — 2026-05-13
============================================================

Jim O'Callaghan (FF), Dublin Bay South

I am pleased to introduce the International Co-operation (Omagh Bombing inquiry) Bill to the Seanad today. The purpose of the Bill is to assist the Omagh bombing inquiry established by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in February 2024 to investigate whether the bombing could have been prevented by UK state authorities. Its terms of reference are set out in the Schedule to the Bill for the ease of Senators.
The Government has made clear its commitment to facilitating and supporting the work of the inquiry to the greatest extent possible, and the Bill before the House today is another important step towards delivering on this commitment. The Bill deals with the taking of oral evidence before our courts and will sit alongside the concrete measures I have already put in place to facilitate the disclosure of Irish State documents to the inquiry.
The bombing of the town of Omagh on 15 August 1998 was the single worst atrocity of the Troubles, resulting in the loss of 31 lives and at least 220 people injured. At a time of collective hope, it was a senseless, brutal terrorist attack that sought to undermine the peace that had been secured some months earlier. The Government has condemned the abhorrent criminal actions of those who planned the attack and planted and detonated the bomb. I do so again today.
The families and survivors in their eloquent testimony to the inquiry's commemorative hearing last year gave voice to the enormity of that loss and its enduring toll. The formal decision taken by the Government on 9 July 2024 to assist the inquiry, and to authorise officials to engage with the inquiry to explore mechanisms for working together, was taken in recognition of the importance of the inquiry for families and survivors and their quest for truth and justice. The programme for Government also clearly reiterates our commitment, stating that we will play our full part in legacy processes, including facilitating and supporting the Omagh inquiry.
Delivering on our commitment to assist an inquiry established by another sovereign state is not without its challenges. There are legal complexities that must be navigated to ensure consistency with the laws of Ireland and the Government's duty to safeguard the essential interests of the State and the constitutional and other rights of citizens. Successive Governments have navigated similar challenges in the past, including assisting the Northern Ireland courts during the civil proceedings taken by the families, and enacting primary and secondary legislation to support cross-Border co-operation with UK authorities.
I have referred to the actions I have already taken to support the Omagh inquiry. These include agreeing a memorandum of understanding with the chairman of the inquiry last April to guide the disclosure of Irish State materials, and implementing measures to support the disclosure of sensitive personal data. These measures are in operation and are working very well, with a significant quantity of Irish State materials, principally from An Garda Síochána, disclosed to the inquiry and more being disclosed on a rolling basis. To date, some 29,000 pages have been disclosed by the Irish Government to the Omagh bombing inquiry.
I welcome the acknowledgement by counsel to the inquiry at its hearing in March of the "considerable efforts that have been made" by Irish authorities and the "effective progress" that is being made to respond to the inquiry's requests. My Department and the Garda Commissioner have dedicated resources in place to support the disclosure process to ensure that it is conducted with rigour and that all potentially relevant material is made available to the inquiry in line with the memorandum of understanding. This is vital and the Government is at one with counsel to the inquiry when he said, on announcing that the first evidential hearings will now start in September, that it is important that the inquiry is not rushed and that it is as comprehensive as it can be in addressing its terms of reference.
Turning to the Bill before the Seanad today, it provides a bespoke legal mechanism to facilitate the taking of sworn evidence from State bodies and former ministerial officeholders before a judge of the High Court at the request of the chairman of the commission. The approach is modelled on the Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Act 2019, which Senators will be aware was enacted to enable the taking of oral evidence from gardaí for the purposes of UK Troubles-related inquests. Importantly, the Bill includes some new features. These take account of the nature of the inquiry and its broader terms of reference, and are aimed at maximising the evidential opportunities available to the chairman and enhancing transparency. I will go through the sections in due course.
This is a stand-alone Bill concerned solely with providing assistance to the Omagh inquiry. The mechanism it provides will be available to the chairman over the lifetime of the inquiry and will allow for assistance to be sought as matters arise in the course of its work. This single focus recognises the significance of the bombing and also the need for speedy enactment. As the House will be aware, I intend to bring forward separate legislative proposals in the coming weeks to progress implementation of the Government's commitments in the joint framework on addressing the legacy of the Troubles agreed with the United Kingdom Government last September.
Part 2 of the Bill contains the substantive provisions detailing the application and operation of the bespoke legal mechanism. As referred to earlier, it is premised on the taking of evidence in this jurisdiction before the High Court. This mirrors the 2019 legislation and is essential to safeguard the interests of the State, including its sovereignty, and the rights of Irish State witnesses, while seeking to maximise evidential opportunities for the inquiry.
As I have said, the mechanism is triggered by a request from the chairman for assistance. Such a request may be made to the Garda. However, section 4 allows the Minister to designate other bodies at the request of the chairman. These other bodies include Departments of State and the Defence Forces.
This is a new feature compared to the 2019 Act and recognises that bodies other than An Garda Síochána hold records that are potentially relevant to the inquiry.
Section 5 deals with how the chairman may request assistance from a State body, be that the Garda or another designated State body. The head of the State body could be the Garda Commissioner or the Chief of Staff. An important development on the 2019 Act is that a request may, in addition to specifying the questions the chairperson is requesting be asked, specify current and past office holders from whom the inquiry wishes to hear. The head may accede to a request in full or in part, but must refuse a request where to do so would be likely to prejudice the security or sovereignty of the State, would be likely to prejudice a criminal investigation or criminal proceedings or would otherwise be inconsistent with the functions, whether statutory, of the designated State body.
I want to emphasise that the assessment requires an individual consideration of each question and the potential evidence concerned. There are no classes of records that are automatically excluded from being put into evidence using this mechanism. Equally, general or speculative assertions of harm will not be enough to ground a refusal; the head must be of the opinion that actual prejudice to the fundamental concerns of the State is likely. I also want to emphasise that the decision by the head of the body is subject to an important check. Prior consultation is required with me, as Minister for justice, and, where relevant, the line Minister. The head of the body is required to make the decision as soon as practicable. This is important to ensure that momentum is maintained. The section also ensures transparency around decision-making by requiring the reasons grounding any refusal to be notified to the chairperson.
Section 6 is similar to section 5, but concerns requests for assistance from former ministerial office holders. This extension seeks to take account of the inquiry’s terms of reference, which include investigation of the approach taken by UK state authorities to security normalisation before and after the Good Friday Agreement. If the inquiry forms a view that a former ministerial office holder has relevant evidence to give, it is appropriate that the State has in place a suitable mechanism to facilitate the taking of such evidence. As I have outlined, sections 5 and 6 make provision for past members of An Garda Síochána or the Defence Forces to be requested to provide assistance. Their participation will be voluntary and subject to their written consent. However, as I stated I expect co-operation from all concerned who are requested to assist. This consent-based approach arises from such persons being private citizens who cannot be compelled to give evidence for the purposes of an inquiry outside the State. The Bill seeks to provide a means for those retired members and officials or ministerial office holders to provide evidence to the inquiry under Irish law.
Section 7 deals with the designation of witnesses.
Section 8 deals with the nomination of the High Court judge who will act as the conduit for the evidence to be taken under sections 9 and 10.
Sections 9 to 11, inclusive, deal with the taking of evidence. Section 9 provides that the nominated judge shall ask the agreed questions, while section 10 enables the chairman or counsel to ask the inquiry to ask follow-up questions. This is a new feature compared to the 2019 Act. Section 11 sets out that the evidence is to be taken on oath, with the same privileges and immunities available before the High Court. The evidence is also to be taken otherwise than in public. This is appropriate as it does not involve the administration of justice. That said, I would draw the attention of the House to the provision that enables core participants and their legal representatives to attend with the chairman and inquiry team. Those core participants represent many of the families. The section also makes clear that the nominated judge may issue directions on the arrangements for the taking of evidence. I would draw attention to the explicit reference to any arrangements necessary for securing the safety of people. Once the evidence has been taken, it will be a matter for the nominated judge to certify it and bring it to the chairperson.
That brings me to the close of how the bespoke mechanism is intended to operate. The Government, through a representative at the opening hearing of the inquiry on 30 July 2024, committed to doing everything in our power to support co-operation, including putting in place new legislation. The inquiry has announced that it will commence its evidential hearings on 21 September. I am committed to having this Bill on the Statute Book by then. I hope to get the support of the Seanad.
I commend and thank the justice committee for waiving pre-legislative scrutiny. I also want to acknowledge the intensive engagement between the inquiry team and my officials over the past months. I thank the inquiry for its constructive approach as we seek to work together to support the inquiry in fulfilling its terms of reference.

---

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/2026-05-13/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:56+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-05-13