Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) (Amendment) Bill 2025: Committee Stage (Resumed) and Remaining Stages
Seanad Éireann — 2026-06-30
============================================================

Jim O'Callaghan (FF), Dublin Bay South

I have just come from a meeting of the Oireachtas committee on justice. These amendments, in particular amendment No. 19, seek to introduce various amendments to section 3 of the Bill. I will take the opportunity to address amendment No. 19, for which I thank Senator Higgins, which would amend the existing section 6(1)(a)(ii) of the principal Act. This subsection of the principal Act currently provides that a person is guilty of an offence under the Act if he or she attempts to engage in terrorist activity or terrorist-linked activity, other than public provocation to commit a terrorist offence. Thus, the Act as it stands does not allow for an attempt offence for public provocation. As mentioned, section 3 reformulates the definition of public provocation and provides in section 4A(a)(ii) that the publication or distribution of a message to the public that glorifies terrorist activity can, if other conditions are met, form part of the offence of public provocation. The inclusion of this provision was required to give effect to the directive. If I understand the intent of Senator Higgins's amendment correctly, it is to ensure that attempts to glorify terrorism are not offences under the Bill. If that is the case, I can assure the Senator that this amendment is unnecessary as this is not an offence under the Bill.
Section 4A(a)(ii) does not refer to an activity, much less an offence. It refers to the characteristic or nature of a message or the content of a message that may, subject to other conditions, form part of the offence of public provocation. The definition of public provocation to commit a terrorist offence in section 3 of the Bill includes the distribution or publication of a message that glorifies a terrorist activity. To meet the definition of the offence, such a message to the public would have had to be published or distributed with the intent of inciting a person to commit a terrorist activity and the message's "distribution or publication" would have to give rise "to the reasonable apprehension that the commission of a terrorist activity could thereby result." Thus, glorification is not of itself an activity or offence under the Bill; rather, it can be a relevant characteristic of a message published or distributed to the public within the definition of public provocation. Further, section 2 of the Bill, which amends section 4 of the principal Act, provides that public provocation to commit a terrorist offence falls within the definition of terrorist-linked activity for the purposes of the Act.
Section 7 of the Bill amends section 6 of the principal Act by, among other things, introducing a new subparagraph (iia) under subsection (1). This new provision provides that attempts to engage in terrorist linked activity are offences under the Act other than "public provocation to commit a terrorist offence". Thus, as attempts to provoke the commission of a terrorist offence are not offences the Bill, so then attempts to glorify terrorism are not offences under the Bill. For these reasons, I cannot support the 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/2026-06-30/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:55:07+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-06-30