International Co-operation (Omagh Bombing Inquiry) Bill 2026: Report and Final Stages
Dail Éireann — 2026-04-29
============================================================

Niall Collins (FF), Limerick County

The Deputy is seeking to insert a new section after section 5 of the Bill providing for the taking of written witness statements from officeholders and former officeholders. The statements would be provided to the designated person, who would in turn provide them to the chairman of the inquiry. If the chairman is satisfied with the contents, he may decide that he does not require the person concerned to give oral evidence. I note that no provision is made in respect of former ministerial officeholders, which presents technical and drafting issues with the Deputy's proposed amendments to later sections of the Bill. There is some confusion in the drafting of the amendment, since, for example, the officeholder may well be the designated person who is to give the oral evidence before the nominated judge of the High Court. What is proposed is at odds with the mechanism provided for in the Bill and does not take account of how the State is working with the inquiry. The mechanism provided for in the Bill is, of necessity, given that the inquiry is established under the laws of another sovereign state, premised on the chairman of the inquiry specifying the questions that he wishes to be asked and the answers to those questions, insofar as they are acceded to, being put into evidence under oath before a nominated judge of the High Court. The questions specified by the chairman will arise from his consideration of the materials that the inquiry has gathered in the course of its work, including witness statements.
As the Deputy will be aware, a memorandum of understanding is in place with the inquiry regarding the disclosure of Irish State materials. A substantial volume of material has been disclosed to date - over 26,000 pages - and that process is ongoing. The inquiry is examining those materials and materials disclosed by the UK state authorities, including the PSNI and intelligence services. The legal representatives of the core participants of the inquiry, principally family members, are also examining the materials shared with them by the inquiry and drawing any potential lines of questioning to the attention of the inquiry team. Through this process, the inquiry is identifying persons from whom it wishes to take written statements. My Department, as the central point of contact for the inquiry, has already received requests for assistance relating to the taking of witness statements from a number of persons and is engaging with An Garda Síochána about the processing of those requests.
Insofar as they may be former officeholders, it will be a matter for them as private citizens to decide whether they wish to provide witness statements, as they cannot be compelled to provide assistance to a foreign inquiry. It is not the case, as proposed in the Deputy's amendment, that the head of a State body can ensure that a former officeholder provides a written statement. A head of a State body has no power to direct a former official and no sanction available to impose in the case of non-compliance. However, as we stated on Second Stage, we expect co-operation from all concerned who are requested to provide assistance.
We anticipate that more requests for witness statements may be received and my Department is giving consideration to formally setting out an agreed process for handling such requests. This will be in the interests of transparency and ease of the inquiry. As I understand how the inquiry is approaching its work following its examination of a written witness statement, it may decide that matters remain that necessitate the taking of oral evidence or that there are no outstanding matters and it does not require the person to provide oral evidence. This applies in the case of UK witnesses as it does in the case of Irish State witnesses.
I am satisfied, following our consultations with the Office of the Attorney General, that there is no need for legislation to support the provision of assistance in relation to the gathering of such written statements. It can be done administratively.
Finally, I am doubtful as to the logic of creating a mechanism whereby the inquiry makes a request for assistance in the form of oral evidence under section 5 even though it may not be evident that oral evidence is required until after the preparation of witness statements. This seems rather back to front. I prefer the logic of the mechanism in the Bill, which is based on the chairman only making a request for assistance where he has established the taking of oral evidence is required.
We are not accepting the amendments, basically.

---

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/2026-04-29/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-09-21T01:01:08+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-04-29