Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) (Amendment) Bill 2025: Committee Stage (Resumed)
Seanad Éireann — 2026-06-11
============================================================

Jim O'Callaghan (FF), Dublin Bay South

Amendment No. 11 seeks to include prohibitions on mass surveillance and indiscriminate searching utilising biometrics within the Data Protection Acts. As there exists at present a prohibition on mass surveillance and indiscriminate searching under the Data Protection Acts, I do not believe the proposed amendment is necessary. I also think it is probably not good legislative practice to duplicate what is already there in the Data Protection Acts. Section 4 of the principal Act - the recording devices Act - notes that the provisions of the recording devices Act are without prejudice to the provisions of the Data Protection Acts. This will also apply to Part 6A, which has been inserted by section 8 of the Bill. It is important to note that section 89(3) of the Data Protection Act provides that profiling that results in discrimination against an individual on the basis of a special category of personal data shall be prohibited. My response to amendment No. 11 is that there are very many significant prohibitions contained within the Data Protection Acts and it would be unnecessary to replicate them in this legislation. There are also clear limitations on searching already set out in section 43C. That information must be in the context of a specific investigation among other things. As I said, the code of practice provisions already set out what needs to be included in the code and these include provisions related to procedures, confidentiality, security, storage, access, retention and parameters for use. As the code can also set out different provisions in relation to the types of biometric data or circumstances in which it can be carried out, for that reason I cannot accept amendment No. 11.
Amendment No. 12 is not necessary. Section 47A sets out what is to be included in the code of practice. This includes the parameters for which it can be carried out. The code of practice for the carrying out of biometric analysis will be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas for private and positive resolutions. This means the Houses will have the opportunity to scrutinise the code alongside the provisions required by section 47A so, again, I cannot accept amendment No. 12.
Amendment No. 13 proposes to change the initial review period from five years to two years. As I stated previously, setting this at five years aligns with the principal Act. We can already see how involved the process of drafting code of practice is. The requirements for assessments and consultation make it a lengthy and detailed process and would further delay the roll-out of what I believe are the necessary digital tools for An Garda Síochána. I accept that a code may need to be reviewed earlier than five years but there is nothing preventing this from happening in the Bill so for that reason, I cannot accept the proposed amendment.

---

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/2026-06-11/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:55:03+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-06-11