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

11. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the steps Ireland has taken to comply with the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on 19 July 2024 on Israel’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territory, which states that member states are under a positive obligation “to abstain from entering into treaty relations with Israel in all cases in which it purports to act on behalf of the Occupied Palestinian Territory or a part thereof on matters concerning the Occupied Palestinian Territory or a part of its territory; to abstain from entering economic or trade dealings with Israel concerning the Occupied Palestinian Territory or parts thereof which may entrench its unlawful presence in the territory”; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40620/24]

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

My question specifically relates to Israel's presence in settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory in the West Bank. I am asking what the Tánaiste is going to do about the advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice which states that member states, including Ireland, are under a positive obligation "to abstain from treaty relations with Israel in all cases in which it purports to act on behalf of the Occupied Palestinian Territory" and "to abstain from entering into economic or trade dealings with Israel". It is set out in the question I have tabled. I ask the Tánaiste to deal with that specifically in the context of the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill, which is waiting to be passed through the Dáil.

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

On 19 July 2024, the International Court of Justice delivered an advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. The Deputy will recall that the Attorney General, on behalf of the Government, made a submission to the court in respect of this. In its advisory opinion, the court concluded that Israel's continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory is unlawful, and that Israel is under an obligation to bring its unlawful presence there to an end as rapidly as possible.

I issued a statement immediately following the delivery of the court's opinion indicating that I would be engaging with partners, including within the EU, with a view to ending Israel's unlawful presence in the occupied Palestinian territory, and bringing about the full realisation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. Ireland subsequently co-sponsored a resolution, adopted by the General Assembly on 18 September 2024, which seeks to implement the court's advisory opinion. The resolution elaborates on the obligations arising for Israel, for all states and for international organisations arising from Israel's unlawful presence in the occupied Palestinian territory, including in the field of trade. For Ireland and all EU member states, international trade falls within the exclusive competence of the Union. As such, Ireland acts through the EU in relation to the conclusion of agreements relating to international trade in goods and services. Trade relations between the EU and its member states and Israel are governed by the EU-Israel Association Agreement.

The EU-Israel Association Agreement expressly provides that it applies to the territory of the State of Israel only. This necessarily excludes the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. Discussions within the European Union on the implications for the Union's policies and practices vis-à-vis Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory have now begun. In these discussions, Ireland has pressed its clear view that the continuation of trade between the EU and Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory helps to sustain those settlements and therefore amounts to aid and assistance in the maintenance of the illegal situation there, entrenching it and making it economically more viable.

The ICJ advisory opinion has made it clear that all states must abstain from entering into economic or trade dealings with Israel concerning the occupied Palestinian territory that may entrench its unlawful presence there. In discussions in Brussels, the Government has called for the EU to take steps to prohibit that trade. In the context of the occupied territories Bill, a further opinion has been asked from the Attorney General. I believe this ICJ advisory opinion changes the situation. I will await the Attorney General's advice. I have already taken some actions on it. I believe it is a new context that, in my view, places obligations on member states to follow the recommendations of the court.

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

I welcome that the Tánaiste is saying it has changed the situation. I would like him to outline how that has changed for Ireland and what, concretely, that means. A total of 500 people have lost their lives in less than a year in the West Bank, a war that continues without any recognition. Now we have this advisory opinion telling us we are all under an obligation. I repeat that I am not given to propaganda or exaggeration but I am in despair at what is happening in Gaza, as many other people are. Yes, the Tánaiste has had some very strong words, but unfortunately the action is not following. One concrete way to do that is to enact the occupied territories Bill. I am glad the Tánaiste is going back to get further advice. Five hundred are dead in one year alone there. That could have been enacted before but we did not do that. Senator Black introduced that Bill in 2018 or 2019 and it has never been enacted. I have no idea why the Tánaiste is still reluctant to go ahead with that Bill.

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

Bill or no Bill, that would unfortunately not stop Israel from what it is doing. What it is doing in the West Bank is reprehensible. I take issue with this latest sort of propaganda that it is just words and not action. I do not accept that and will not accept it. I will consistently rebut that argument because Ireland has taken action and will continue to take action on all levels. The Bill itself seeks to restrict the import and sale of goods and the provision of services originating from settlements in relevant occupied territories. As we have said, I think the ICJ advisory opinion gives new context to this. I do not have the Attorney General's opinion yet but we will be getting it shortly. Previously, it was concluded in legal advice that the Bill was contrary to EU law and that certain provisions are unconstitutional and so on because of the common commercial policy under EU law, where this is an exclusive EU competence. However, I genuinely believe that the ICJ's advisory opinion, in our view, places obligations on states not to support the occupation in any way, shape, or form. We will come back to the House as soon as we have that opinion from the Attorney General.

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

I welcome that. However, we were always under an obligation under the Genocide Convention relating to the trade with Israel, with regard to human rights. We could have taken action and we can take action. On the occupied territories Bill, we have experts in law, including two of the world's leading experts, stating that we are fully entitled to pass the occupied territories Bill. The legal opinion comes from Professor Tridimas, a leading EU law specialist who has served as an adviser to the European Commission and European Parliament, and, with apologies for my pronunciation, Professor Koutrakos, three-time European Commission Jean Monnet chair in EU law, and so on. An ordinary person would know that you cannot trade with a country that is committing genocide. An ordinary person knows that, at some stage, that trade has to cease one way or another if we are to give meaning to our words. I repeat that the Tánaiste has said very strong words without action. We have recognised Palestine but there will be no Palestine to recognise if we let the genocide continue.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I commend Deputy Connolly on submitting this question. The fact the occupied territories Bill has not been implemented is a ruse, as far as I am concerned. The Government has been hiding behind the Attorney General's advice, considering that Fine Gael opposed this. We are told that a Fine Gael Minister told an Israeli counterpart that it would not happen. People can dispute whether that conversation took place, but we know that what the Fine Gael Minister is purported to have committed to is exactly what happened. It is six weeks since the Taoiseach announced that he had asked the Attorney General to review this matter. He said he expected a reply from the Attorney General within days. Has he got it yet? If not, has the Government been pressing the Attorney General for that?

How is it that Ireland is able to bring forward a resolution at UN level, which I welcome, calling for a global ban on the trade of settlement goods? We are rightly calling for that at an international level, along with other states, yet domestically we have not introduced the legislation that would allow us to ban trade with settlement goods. When does the Tánaiste expect the Attorney General's advice to come? Is the Government pressing the Attorney General's office for that? When it is available to the Government, will it publish it and share it with Members of the Oireachtas?

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

I take issue with what the Deputy said in respect of his reference to the Minister, Deputy Donohoe. The Deputy said we "can dispute". The Minister has said categorically that no such phone call took place. It is not a question. It is important for the record of the House that we put that on record. The Minister spoke to me regarding it. We have to be fair to everybody and not continue to propagandise.

It is not a ruse. The legal opinion is there from previous Attorneys General in respect of an EU competency issue and some constitutional issues. The International Court of Justice is the full expression of international humanitarian law and the highest body within the UN. There is a judicial framework. We are a member of the UN. We have already initiated action at EU level on this, not just by calling for a review of the EU-Israeli trade association agreement but also in respect of the ICJ advisory opinion. Josep Borrell has asked for a legal opinion from the external action service on this. I do not think Europe or member states can ignore the implications of the advisory opinion's recommendations. Ireland again led the way in enabling this opinion to happen. I find it extremely frustrating that is not acknowledged. We supported the resolution that gave rise to this opinion coming up in the first place. Our Attorney General made a very strong submission-----

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That has been acknowledged.

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

-----which has been endorsed-----

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Why do you keep looking for acknowledgement for things? We are looking for action.

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

Sometimes the Deputy does not like what I have to say and he interrupts. The bottom line is that is action. That is my point. As soon as the opinion was issued, Ireland went back in and cosponsored a resolution to give effect to it and call on states to implement it. That is action.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Implement it here first.

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

It is not just words.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Implement it here first is the ask. That is a genuine ask.

Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are moving on. At the rate we are going, we will barely hit the next question.