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

In the first instance, we need to recognise that interpretation of this legislation when somebody is being prosecuted for an offence under section 4A of the principal Act is the function of the Judiciary. No matter what the Senator or I say, we are not the interpreters. However, I do have a responsibility to set out the clear intention of the legislation. When the court comes to examine the offence and consider the section, it will primarily rely upon the wording we have put into the legislation. The Senator mentioned in her introductory remarks the question of whether something could be considered to incite. There is a requirement that there be an intention on the part of the accused to incite persons to commit terrorist activities. Therefore, the fact that something could be considered inciting is not sufficient.
On the definition of terrorist activity, the Senator will see that the earlier part of the legislation, section 2 sets out the definition of terrorist activity. It is much more limited than the types of definitions that are included within legislation in Germany or indeed the UK. I am more confident talking about the legislation that operates in the UK than that in Germany. Section 13 of the UK's Terrorism Act 2000 is legislation I would not even attempt to introduce here. It is nowhere near the legislation that I propose to the Seanad today. That Act states that if you wear an emblem that can be seen as supportive of a prescribed organisation, you are committing an offence. It is an extraordinarily broad criminal Act that covers organisations that can be proscribed by a Minister just at the stroke of a pen. That is not what is envisaged here.
It is also important to point out that, under subsection 6(6) of the 2005 Act, where a person is charged with an offence that, in the opinion of the Attorney General, was committed in or outside the State with any of a listed set of intentions, the proceedings can proceed only with the consent of the Attorney General. That is another safety net.
To answer the Senator's queries briefly and respond to her concerns, there is nothing I see in what I am proposing in section 3 that could give rise to the type of prosecutions that concern her and that we have seen in the UK. Here, there must be an intention to incite a person to commit terrorist activity. Terrorist activity is very clearly defined in section 2.

---

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