Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

67. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the details of his engagement with senior management in the Defence Forces with regard to the number of serving members who have convictions for gender-based violence; his plans to publish the recent audit by the Defence Forces carried out in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28181/24]

Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

75. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the convictions under the civilian criminal justice system that are deemed serious enough to warrant dismissal of serving Defence Forces members under the court martial system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28186/24]

Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

91. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if he has had any engagement with the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces following a recent court case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28149/24]

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I stay with the same issue. I am asking for details of the Tánaiste's engagement with senior management in the Defence Forces with regard to the number of serving members who have convictions for gender-based violence, and his plans to publish the recent audit carried out by the Defence Forces in this regard. I am asking this question in the context of the Women of Honour documentary in October 2021. Shockingly, the Commission on Defence Forces shockingly made no reference whatsoever to members charged or convicted of serious criminal offences, and it was asked to look at structures.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 67, 75 and 91 together.

I thank the Deputies for their questions. I can confirm there has been engagement with the Chief of Staff and we yesterday to discuss these very serious issues. Following a recent case, I was informed on Friday, 21 June of another case involving a member who is still serving after being convicted of assault causing harm. In light of this, I immediately requested a report from the Chief of Staff to find out how many serving members of the Defence Forces have civil convictions or are before the civil courts on serious criminal offences. I received an initial report on this matter. I was not quite satisfied with the first report and sought a more detailed version and further clarification. On Wednesday last, I was informed of 68 Defence Forces personnel who have been convicted or are currently before the civil courts on a range of criminal offences including public order, drink-driving, drugs offences, physical assault, sexual offences and others.

Recent events are, without doubt, extremely concerning and unacceptable. As already stated, I have issued an instruction that, with immediate effect, all serving personnel, either convicted of sexual assault or rape and awaiting discharge or currently before the courts for such offences, are to be put on local leave on a without prejudice basis. There are provisions in the regulations to allow for this. It is essential that due process in these serious cases is followed on a consistent basis across the organisation. I have a concern this has not been happening, and I discussed this with the Chief of Staff and made that point clearly.

I have appointed Peter Ward, senior counsel, to undertake a high-level analysis of the application of military law in circumstances where personnel have been convicted of serious offences in the civil courts. Mr. Ward will be asked to come back with an outcome of this high-level analysis along with any recommendations and any enhanced powers that may be necessary to improve processes, regulation, legislation and reporting arrangements. The terms of reference are nearly finalised.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome that the Tánaiste is taking a hands-on approach, but can he imagine? We have had a commission on the future of the Defence Forces. We have the documentary on the Women of Honour. We have a tribunal set up. However, he, as Tánaiste of this country, the second most important role, has to repeatedly ask the what the situation is. He gets a report, and he is not happy with it, so he gets another report. He is then told there are 68 Defence Forces personnel who have been convicted or are before the courts one way or another. What period of time are we talking about with the 68? Is it one year or two years? How does he explain different discrepancies where 68 was given and a lesser number was given on another occasion? It is absolutely unsatisfactory. If the Tánaiste remembers with the Women of Honour, trust was the biggest thing. It was to have trust in a system and that they would be believed and listened to. Here we now have a situation on a drip-feed basis related to the most serious offences, all arising from a courageous woman, Natasha O'Brien. Once again, it is women coming forward courageously but there is nothing proactive. I think the Tánaiste is on record as saying there is no proactive mechanism. Can we have clear details, please?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the previous speaker stated, this is about the fear generated by some of the activities that have gone on unknown to the public. It is the fear of women who are obviously in constant fear of being attacked, and unfortunately these attacks have happened horrendously. Some of the cases are so bad that to allow anything even remotely associated to continue indefinitely is wrong. I know the Tánaiste is committed to this. I ask that everything possible be done in the shortest possible time to ensure we do not have this culture indefinitely.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I said earlier that I think the level of violence in our society, against women in particular, is at an alarming level. People will say we had it in the past and so on. We have discussed this among other issues. I find it unconscionable, and I cannot understand how people can engage in such violence against fellow human beings on the streets or in any location. However, we have to do a deeper analysis of what is at play in society, and the role of social media and other factors.

As far as I am concerned, however, and as I said earlier, for the Defence Forces the standard should be even higher, because the Defence Forces are meant to protect society and people.

We have established a tribunal of inquiry in respect of issues the Women of Honour raised. To be clear, while I accept what Deputy Connolly is saying, there was resistance to that, and there is still resistance to the concept of cultural change and transformation. When I recently brought legislation before this House, that was manifest and people may have inadvertently, for different reasons, opposed certain aspects of that Bill. It is about culture change, yet a campaign was mounted to undermine it. I was very frustrated at that. The tribunal is up and running, and I ordered a year ago that all sexual assaults must go to the Garda.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Tánaiste. We are out of time.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not have much time to reply. Statements are scheduled in the House tomorrow and I will happily elaborate then, if I have the time the Tánaiste has had, on how we have got to this stage and how we ignored an interdepartmental committee in 1997 that came forward with recommendations. The violence is not an epidemic or a pandemic. It is violence mostly by men against women, but also by some women against men.

Specifically, I am asking the Tánaiste why we have to rely on a drip-drip basis to get information. I have asked him specifically about the 68 people he mentioned. What period are we talking about?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am sorry. It is two years.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about the other years? Where is the analysis of that? How many serving members are before the military court?

In respect of Peter Ward, for whom I have great respect, what are his terms of reference? Will we see them? After what period will the report be published? I go back to the Women of Honour, Natasha O'Brien and all the other women, and what they have put up with. I am not happy to be here tonight while the Tánaiste begins to tell us violence is unacceptable. That goes without saying. It is about what we do in this Dáil to stop it. We set up a Commission on the Defence Forces - I mention it for the third time – but it did not mention this subject even once. It had been commissioned to look at the structures within the Defence Forces and utterly failed to look at it.

I ask the Tánaiste to answer my questions now, regarding Peter Ward, the number of people involved, the other years that will apply and who is looking at it. Furthermore, and I thank the Ceann Comhairle for his indulgence, the Women of Honour group has asked whether any consideration will be given to extending the terms of reference of the tribunal to include assaults against civilians by Army personnel.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Peter Ward's function relates to assessing whether the existing Defence Forces regulations are fit for purpose in this context, as well as relating to the military liaison office, and carrying out a high-level analysis of it. There are 68 cases, going back about two years or maybe just a bit before that.

The tribunal of inquiry is going to take a lengthy time. It is going back 40 years already, if not more. The idea we would then extend the terms of reference to cover every civil case over the past 40 years is not realistic, and I say that seriously. We have to make sure we at least get a tribunal that can finish within three years. I am sceptical as to whether it can finish within three years but I hope it will. It is a public inquiry.

We have taken a whole range of measures. There is a sexual ethics programme under way, led by Professor Louise Crowley, in our Defence Forces. I would expect a speedy return from the senior counsel, Peter Ward, and I will publish that.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Tánaiste will publish the terms of reference and the report.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, the terms of reference will be published tomorrow morning. I had hoped it would happen for Question Time tonight but I will have them published tomorrow, because I want to get a comprehensive analysis. People are saying we do not have this or that. I have to be careful because there is another case, on which we got a separate report, that is now in a process, but it is nonetheless clear there is inconsistency, a lack of follow-through, a lack of proactive management and a lack of collation of data, which is not satisfactory. There is a broader measure we passed at Cabinet this morning, the CHoD legislation, which was recommended by the Commission on the Defence Forces. To me, that is essential to address a structure in the Defence Forces that is not fit for purpose, as per the 1954 Act.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Tánaiste. We are way over time.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is simply not fit for purpose and that is manifest again in how this situation has evolved.