Search the record

prejudice to the sovereignty or security of the State, and only where such risk cannot reasonably be mitigated through redaction, protective measures, or partial disclosure,”. Sinn Féin has repeatedly highlighted how national security has frequently been cited in Britain to restrict disclosure in legacy investigations, often leaving families

risk and that it should only be used as a ground for refusal where risk mitigations such as redactions or partial disclosures would not afford sufficient protection. We do not believe that these qualifications overcome the ultimate effect, which would be to lower the threshold. Amendment … have taken to support and facilitate the work of the inquiry, including putting in place a memorandum of understanding in relation to the disclosure of materials implementing measures to support the disclosure of sensitive personal data and bringing forward this Bill, and it will inform our consideration

safeguards. It requires independent financial legal advice, provides for a cooling-off period and clear disclosure requirements and ensures that these agreements are subject to proper regulatory oversight. Most importantly, it protects the homeowner's rights to remain in their home for life. This is a central principle

that might work in practice. Concerns have also been raised that national security limits could restrict disclosure because governments, particularly the Government of our nearest neighbour, often protect intelligence services and operations. Under the terms of this Bill, as they stand, officials may decline to provide evidence

addressing domestic, sexual and gender-based violence in Ireland, particularly when the alleged perpetrators are members of An Garda Síochána. Reliance on self-disclosure leaves systematic blind spots, allowing potential perpetrators to maintain investigative authority over other victims. Without statutory oversight, independent monitoring and systemic reform, Garda structures … welcome the recent setting up of the dedicated domestic violence unit, but does the Taoiseach agree that the mandatory reporting of barring and protection orders is now necessary? Does he believe it is right that a garda who is convicted of breaking the law should still serve

national security and other essential interests of the State, and meeting obligations to, inter alia, investigate crime, protect life and comply with data protection obligations. The Bill does this by requiring that the questions to be answered by the witness must be approved in advance by the head … place of the chairman of the inquiry, but without factual knowledge of all the material available to the chairman through the disclosure process or the chairman’s lines of investigation. This would be to greatly alter the intended role of the nominated judge, who is to act only

Minister for Transport whether the Irish Aviation Authority has submitted annual reports to his Department as required by Section 19 of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 detailing the number of protected disclosures received and actions taken; whether those reports accurately reflect the outcome of each investigation, including

Digitalisation whether any assessment has been undertaken of the potential litigation risk arising from administrative decisions taken by public bodies in relation to protected disclosures where the evidential presumption provided for under Sections 12 and 13 of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, as amended, is not applied

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan asked the Minister for Transport whether the Irish Aviation Authority, in its capacity as a prescribed person under the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, has in all cases appointed a designated person to independently receive and handle protected disclosures; acknowledged receipt of each disclosure within

Flynn asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation whether he is satisfied that the current administrative handling of protected disclosures by public bodies fully reflects the objectives of Directive (EU) 2019/1937, in particular the requirement to ensure effective protection against retaliation

Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation whether he accepts that the evidential presumption in respect of penalisation under the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, as amended, is not currently required to be applied during the administrative handling and investigation of disclosures by public bodies

circular or binding instruction to all Departments, agencies, and prescribed persons requiring that, in assessing alleged penalisation of a reporting person under the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, as amended, decision-makers apply an evidential approach consistent with that set out in the Act for adjudicative proceedings. [24677/26

Digitalisation his views on whether there is a flaw in the way in which EU Directive 2019/1937 has been transposed with the Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Act 2022 in relation to the fact that the burden of proof is reversed when penalisation is alleged, but this has only been