nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

New anti-terrorism laws for Ireland to be introduced ‘within weeks’

RobYourBuilder

NEW COUNTER-TERRORISM laws will be on the statute books in a “period of weeks”, according to the Minister for Foreign Affairs Charlie Flanagan.

Flanagan attended a meeting with other EU foreign ministers in Brussels yesterday, where they discussed ways to boost cooperation to combat the threat posed by radicalised Europeans returning home after fighting in Iraq and Syria.

Speaking after the meeting he said that he was in daily contact with the Minister for Justice Frances Fitzgerald in relation to the terror threat.

He said that while Europe has a role to play as a collective, so do individual governments.

The legislation due to be introduced shortly will see it being a criminal offence to direct or train those involved in “terrorist acts and terrorism”, said Flanagan.

“There currently exists a power for the revocation of citizenship,” said the minister, which could mean the withdrawal of passports “in certain circumstances”, said Flanagan.

He said he would support this measure.

“Terrorism as we know is adaptable, it doesn’t remain static. Similarly our laws need also to adapt and change… I would expect this new legislation to be on the statute books within a period of weeks.”

http://www.thejournal.ie/anti-terrorism-laws-ireland-1891477-Jan2015/

A most welcome development. Good to see that the government is being proactive about this. What do you think? Are they right or are they throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

mikom

Gerry Adams bashing in 3, 2, 1...........

who the fug

mikom wrote: »

Gerry Adams bashing in 3, 2, 1...........

I don't see why? also unless they have been reformed over the last 20 years, Ireland has some of the most restrictive anti terror laws, and doesn't need any more.

Is this Flangan any relation to Oliver J

Donkey Oaty

mikom wrote: »

Gerry Adams bashing in 3, 2, 1...........

Thanks for the warning, but you could have given us more time.

RobYourBuilder

who the fug wrote: »

Is this Flangan any relation to Oliver J

He is his son.

who the fug

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

He is his son.

Big Liberal then

bear1

Well, I think the first thing they should do is create an official intelligence agency which is tasked with searching out these types of individuals.
Also, our laws are already there for anti-terrorism, it's the judges that need to act accordingly on them.
Those who are found to be fighting abroad should have immediately their citizenship removed (if they have one) and also barred from returning.
I'm also curious as to which definition these laws will come under?

[Deleted User]

Boots on the ground?

Totalitarian state on its way, God save the EU!

Of course you would have to question why they continue to allow complete nutters to travel through immigration control, but eh ho everything is a means to an end!

Sociopath2

If they actually follow through and start revoking citizenship, that would be a welcome development. An Irish passport is very well received around the world, so it makes a great mask to hide behind when you are engaged in something untoward. Mossad have made use of that on occasion.

tomwaterford

Is Ireland not well served by offenses against the state act

[Deleted User]

tomwaterford wrote: »

Is Ireland not well served by offenses against the state act

But we are in the Big EU now, we needs laws that override our own laws, Just like the Human rights courts!

[Deleted User]

bear1 wrote: »

Well, I think the first thing they should do is create an official intelligence agency which is tasked with searching out these types of individuals.
Also, our laws are already there for anti-terrorism, it's the judges that need to act accordingly on them.
Those who are found to be fighting abroad should have immediately their citizenship removed (if they have one) and also barred from returning.
I'm also curious as to which definition these laws will come under?

Fighting abroad? Or just terrorism/illegal groups abroad?

Sociopath2

bear1 wrote: »

Well, I think the first thing they should do is create an official intelligence agency which is tasked with searching out these types of individuals.
Also, our laws are already there for anti-terrorism, it's the judges that need to act accordingly on them.
Those who are found to be fighting abroad should have immediately their citizenship removed (if they have one) and also barred from returning.
I'm also curious as to which definition these laws will come under?

I expect the new laws are designed to specifically target the support network for these people, which is what our problem mainly consists of here. We have fairly robust laws for dealing with anyone engaging in terrorism on our soil, there may be a blind spot where we have people directing or training terrorists to fight in a foreign country (outside the obvious example of NI).

We definitely do need a domestic intelligence agency though.

aaakev

riffmongous wrote: »

Fighting abroad? Or just terrorism/illegal groups abroad?

Would have to be illegal terror groups only

bear1

riffmongous wrote: »

Fighting abroad? Or just terrorism/illegal groups abroad?

Fighting for terrorism and illegal groups. ISIS, Al'Qaeda etc.

Richard Hillman

The reason for this is because it is illegal to train for terrorist activities (shooting, making bombs etc) but if just say a radicalised group wanted to just say use the wicklow mountains for fitness, cold weather training then that would be currently legal.

They could easily do their core training in Ireland then go to a country that has access to guns and they would be as good as fully trained up fighters for ISIS or whoever.

Although whatever laws are introduced, it is impossible to stop a guy jogging a couple of miles with heavy equipment on his own bat.

wp_rathead

Deleted User wrote: »

But we are in the Big EU now, we needs laws that override our own laws, Just like the Human rights courts!

those pesky human right courts

Akrasia

Will there be some element of online activity included in this?

I heard mention of 'recruiting' being part of the new legislation. If someone has a youtube channel who spends his time calling for Jihad against the west, could that be included?

This could have impacts on freedom of expression if they get the balance wrong?

Also, could they include references to 'cyber terrorism' which might not be covered by existing legislation

The_Valeyard

‘Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.’

Benjamin Franklin

Hoop66

Rushed legislation is always helpful...

BeerWolf

Aside from terrorists themselves, they need to tackle radicalism too.

A good start would be to IMMEDIATELY deport any preachers and imams that promote for violence and hatred, it is these individuals that have PRIMARILY been preying on young Muslims. No warning, no jail time... an immediate boot; Why? Warning them will make them go underground and carry on what they do, and in jail they'd just carry on with Muslim inmates or convert to Islam.

Those that leave the country to join their jihad in Syria, Iraq or whatever, should immediately have their passport and Irish citizenship revoked, and not allowed to come back.

Tabnabs

I wonder will our neighbours in the UK be so quick to rush through this new legislation? They face a much larger threat from Islamic fundamentalism and yet are deliberately slow to change the law with regards to what is and is not acceptable. It always alarms me when, at a time when any threat to Ireland is officially put at 'Low', we ram yet more laws into the statute books just to keep up with our EU masters...

AboutaWeekAgo

Patriot Act?

Meathlass

BeerWolf wrote: »

A good start would be to IMMEDIATELY deport any preachers and imams that promote for violence and hatred.

What if they're Irish - where do you suggest we deport them to?

How will we define promoting violence and hatred? Half the country could end up with no citizenship :pac:

conorhal

The_Valeyard wrote: »

‘Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.’

Benjamin Franklin

I suspect that ol Ben probably didn't concieve of asymetric urban warfare in which islamic terrorists targeted civilians any more then he considered the notion that an 8yr old might load 40mm armour peircing, caseless, teflon tipped rounds into her Hello Kitty assault rife, when the right to bare armes was discussed.

Peregrine

bear1 wrote: »

Well, I think the first thing they should do is create an official intelligence agency which is tasked with searching out these types of individuals.

What makes you think nobody is searching out individuals with terrorism links? I don't believe that the Special Branch, Surveillance Unit and the Directorate of Intelligence are sitting there doing nothing.

Pumpkinseeds

I particularly like the bit where he says 'we should forge links with friendly Arab states' who condemn terrorism. Would these be the same 'friendly Arab states' that publically lash people on a weekly basis for publishing something they deem offensive to their religion? Would they also be the same 'friendly Arab states' that have been using what equates to slave labour in building for the World Cup. The same 'friendly Arab states' where many of the slave labourers have vanished without trace? Fcuking hypocrite.

BeerWolf

Meathlass wrote: »

What if they're Irish - where do you suggest we deport them to?

How will we define promoting violence and hatred? Half the country could end up with no citizenship :pac:

Then they'll become stateless, and exiled... they can **** off to the Middle East if they love it's way of life and laws there.

And it's not hard to spot a radical with what they preach...

bear1

Nim wrote: »

What makes you think nobody is searching out individuals with terrorism links? I don't believe that the Special Branch, Surveillance Unit and the Directorate of Intelligence are sitting there doing nothing.

I don't think that no one is doing anything. But there is more than one branch I believe and this could cause discrepancies.
Maybe we should just have one dedicated intel branch?

Peregrine

bear1 wrote: »

I don't think that no one is doing anything. But there is more than one branch I believe and this could cause discrepancies.
Maybe we should just have one dedicated intel branch?

There's the Garda Crime and Security Branch and the Defence Forces Directorate of Intelligence with co-operation between the two organisations. How do you propose we simplify it further?

bear1

Nim wrote: »

There's the Garda Crime and Security Branch and the Defence Forces Directorate of Intelligence with co-operation between the two organisations. How do you propose we simplify it further?

Merge them into one.