Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 16 June 2026
684. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the way in which an individual can challenge or even become aware of an allegation that results in them being targeted for Garda monitoring, potentially for years, without notification. [45531/26]
Amharc ar fhreagra686. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the reason mobile phone service providers are not required to question, flag, or independently assess Garda requests where allegations of unlawful monitoring are raised. [45533/26]
Amharc ar fhreagra687. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the transparent and accountable systems that exist to protect individuals who believe they are being unlawfully monitored by the State or the Garda. [45534/26]
Amharc ar fhreagra690. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the reason the complaints referee never, to public knowledge, upheld a finding of unlawful monitoring by the Garda; and his views on whether this indicates that the role is not fit for purpose. [45539/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 684, 686, 687 and 690 together.
As the Deputy is aware, in Ireland, lawful interception is governed by the Interception of Postal Packets and Telecommunications Messages (Regulation) 1993. The Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration may authorise bodies designated under the Act to lawfully intercept communications for the purposes of investigating serious crime or safeguarding the security of the State. Under section 6 of the Act, an application for authorisation of interception may be made by the Garda Commissioner, the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces, or the Police Ombudsman.
Use of the 1993 Act is subject to a number of strict conditions including that investigations not involving interception have failed, or are likely to fail, to produce the necessary information or evidence; that the intelligence resulting from an interception would be of material assistance and that it is justified, notwithstanding the importance of preserving privacy.
Section 12 of the 1993 Act restricts disclosure in respect of lawful interception authorisations and it places a requirement on the Minister to ensure that such arrangements are in place to limit to the minimum necessary for the purpose of the prevention or detection of serious offences or in the interests of the security of the State, the disclosure of the fact that an authorisation has been given, and the contents of any communication which has been intercepted pursuant to an authorisation.
It is not the practice, and it would be contrary to the public interest, to disclose detail of any authorisations to intercept or indeed to comment on the specific details of any means that may be used by State agencies in exercising statutory lawful interception powers.
The operation of the Act is overseen independently by the Independent Examiner of Security Legislation, the office for which was established by the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024. The Independent Examiner keeps under review compliance by the competent authorities with the requirements of the Act and has extensive powers for that purpose. He is required to report annually to the Taoiseach while also having the power to submit special reports where, in his opinion, the gravity of the matter or other circumstances, so require. The Independent Examiner's first annual report was submitted to the Taoiseach on 16 April last and laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas, as required. It was also published on the Examiner's website at www.independentexaminer.ie.[] Prior to the establishment of the Independent Examiner, this role was carried out by judges of the High Court designated for the purposes of the Act.
There is also a statutory Complaints Referee under section 9 of the 1993 Act, who can receive and investigate any complaints made relating to lawful interception. In carrying out his functions, the Complaints Referee has, by law, full access to people and records he considers relevant to his investigations and my officials have a duty to cooperate with him. The steps to be taken by the Complaints Referee on the completion of an investigation of a complaint are governed by section 9.
While still appropriate and in use today, the 1993 Act does not apply to modern digital communications. I recently announced that the Government had approved my proposals to draft a new Communications (Interception and Lawful Access) Bill which will update and replace the current Act. This is essential to ensure that the law in this area can yield the intelligence that is vital to combat serious and organised crime and threats to the security of the State, including terrorism.
The new legislation will include further legal safeguards and will, for the first time, make provision for judicial authorisation of interception requests.
