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 thank Senator Higgins for coming back in to talk about amendments Nos. 13 and 14. At the outset, I assure the Senator that the types of examples she gave on the floor of this House as potential prosecutable offences are not offences. I do not see any circumstance as to how they could apply or come within the terms of section 3 of the legislation. However, I have a problem with provisions going into criminal statutes that begin by stating, “For the avoidance of doubt”, and then go on to specify what is not covered. It is bad drafting procedure to put into legislation, “For the avoidance of doubt, this is not covered”, because it assumes that all that is not covered must be specified. There are many other things not covered by this legislation. I would be concerned if we started saying that X and Y are not covered because people might then say that Z must be covered because it is not expressly ruled out.
As the Senator will be aware, we have strong freedom of expression rules in this country based, in the first instance, on our Constitution and, in the second instance, on the European Convention on Human Rights, ECHR. They vigorously defend the right of people to express their opinions, such as the examples the Senator identified in her contribution.
Looking at section 3, the important part in order for this offence to be triggered is that there has to be the intention of inciting persons to commit terrorist activity. It only triggers if that occurs. It is important to note, in the context of the directive that is being transposed, that the types of events we are talking about here are those like that horrific attack in the Bataclan. If there were individuals who incited others - more naive people - to get involved in the commission of a terrorist act such as that, then those masterminds behind it, who may have been influential on impressionable people who came before them, should have a criminal liability. That is the purpose of section 3. The purpose of section 3 is not in any way to curtail freedom of expression in the circumstances and examples the Senator set out.

---

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