Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill 2026: Report and Final Stages
Dail Éireann — 2026-07-07
============================================================

Sinéad Gibney (SD), Dublin Rathdown

I will build on the discussions we had on this on Committee Stage. The Minister seemed to rely quite heavily on the argument around the Spanish language as a rebuttal to the Opposition stance that Spain has done it and, as Deputy Ó Laoghaire said, the sky has not fallen in and there have been no infringement proceedings. If the Minister of State has any other information in that regard, I look forward to hearing it. The Minister did not quite concede this as the reality of the situation but she went some way to agreeing that the passage of this legislation will not make us compliant with the ICJ ruling. I understand the Government's position is that it will bring us towards compliance and that we still have a way to go. We have heard about the Government's objective and proposal that the remaining compliance vacuum left by the legislation will be met at European level, which is a stronger way to do it. We all agree it is stronger. We also all recognise the complexity and delay that come with trying to agree anything at European level. The reality is that the passage of this Bill means we will not be compliant with the ICJ ruling. That is the simple reality. Until there is a European solution, if there is one, to fill the services gap, we will not be compliant. The Minister, if not fully conceding that, did at least acknowledge it.
I draw the Minister of State's attention to Article 29.3 of Bunreacht na hÉireann. His Department has stated that a commitment to the rule of international law is enshrined in the Constitution of Ireland and is one of the core principles of Irish foreign policy. Indeed, under that article, Ireland commits to accepting the principles of international law "as its rule of conduct in its relations with other States". Here is a clear opportunity for us to comply with international law as per the ruling of the ICJ in July 2024. Two years on from that ruling, this is our first legislative attempt to comply. The legislation was on the books already and could have been dealt with much more quickly. We have all expressed our frustration with all of that.
Nonetheless, we are here at this point where we have a measure to do that. Rather than looking at, for example, the Spanish language as a barrier or the European-level services gambit as a proposal or a way forward, why are we not starting from this point? How will we develop legislation that is compliant with international law and then work backwards from that? That is what I do not get. It seems to me that the Government is just throwing more and more barriers up to us accepting the reality that we are obliged constitutionally, morally and legally to comply with international law and we are about to pass legislation that will not do that. It is not compliant with international law.
How has Article 29.3 factored in the Government's discussions, if it has? How can the Government stand over the passage of this legislation without making it compliant with international law?

---

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/dail/2026-07-07/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-09-14T01:01:07+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-07-07