Paul Murphy: Defends Climate Protesters, Condemns 'Empty Promises'

Thanks Gheerlach. Last week two climate change protesters, Orla and Zac, were up in court charged with criminal damage. Orla was alleged to have painted no more empty promises on Ivy House and Zac was simply alleged to have filmed it but they could both face years in prison for some paint on a building which was washed off in a couple of days. In the UK obviously the Colston 4 were acquitted because people, the jury, found that their actions in tearing down the notorious slave trader was justified should we have a similar defence available here. Thank you Gheerlach, I thank the Deputy for raising this important question. As the Deputy will be aware the right to protest peacefully is enshrined in the Constitution and under the law. It is an essential part of our democracy. Ongardashia Khanna, through its human rights led approach to policing, seeks to uphold and protect the right to freedom of assembly and to protest, while also upholding the law and protecting the public and businesses. Balancing the right to protest while protecting the public and upholding the rule of law is a complex task and the Gardaí review their actions and responses on a regular basis. I am assured by the Gardaí commissioner that Ongardashia Khanna received detailed training based on a human rights first approach to any protest. This approach was acknowledged and commended by the policing authority over the course of their 16 reports on policing performance during the COVID-19 pandemic. This balance and emphasis on human rights is also reflected in the relevant statutes governing the right to protest and to criminal damage. Respectively, the Criminal Justice Public Order Act of 1994 and the Criminal Damage Act of 1991. There are no plans to amend the Criminal Damage Act to incorporate a defence of protest. As the Deputy will be aware, the enforcement of the law, including those governing protest and criminal damage, are strictly operational matters for the Gardaí commissioner. As the Minister, I have no direct role in them. Furthermore, the decision to prosecute any member of the public for any crime is a matter for the Director of Public Prosecutions, who again is independent in the exercise of her functions. As the Minister, I cannot comment on any decision made by the DPP. Once the DPP has decided to prosecute, the outcome of any switch prosecution is decided by the courts, who are subject only to the Constitution and on the law, and again independent in the exercise of their functions. As the Deputy will be fully aware, it is not appropriate for me to comment on any case that is before the courts. Who are the criminals here when we look at the world hurtling towards climate disaster? Is it the big oil companies? Those who want to burn $5 trillion worth of fossil fuels under the ground to maximise their profits at the expense of humanity and our planet? Is it the governments, which know about the science, which accept the science, but choose to do precious little about it? Or is it those who speak out? Is it those who say, no more empty promises? Because they are the people who are being prosecuted. That is the choice that has been made. Or look at the example of Aisling O'Keefe, the Rosa activist in Limerick, being prosecuted for allegedly organising a protest against gender-based violence, at a time when 999 calls were being ignored by the Gardaí in terms of domestic violence. So what are the priorities of this State when it comes to balancing the rights that the Minister talks about? As the Deputy will agree, climate is the defining challenge of our time. In Ireland we are already experiencing the result of this through flooding, more extreme weather and rising sea levels. As the threats from climate change increase, so does the need for urgent action to address them. The Government recognises this and is taking ambitious climate action steps as necessary to ensure a sustainable future both nationally and globally. The programme for Government commits to some of the strongest climate targets in the world. These have now been legislated for in-new climate legislation. The Government is creating and implementing policies and strategies to achieve its long-term goal of transitioning to a low-carbon, climate resilient and environmentally sustainable economy by 2050. The Government recognises the vital role of the public in addressing climate change. It facilitates public engagement and participation, supporting citizens, communities, businesses and organisations in taking action. But again, as the Deputy is fully aware, I cannot comment on individual cases. While the Minister cannot comment on individual cases, the Government could commit to change the law to ensure that these sort of prosecutions do not happen again. I mean, I think it is an incredible situation that public money is being spent to pursue two young climate activists that could face years and years in jail for allegedly painting a slogan on a building and allegedly filming the painting of a slogan on a building. Or, in the case of Aisling O'Keefe, a fine for organising socially distanced protest against gender-based violence. That is a question of political priority. The only conclusion that I can draw is that actually the Government wants to be able to continue to make empty promises. That is all what the Government has to do on climate change. You look at the carbon budgets, which do not even meet the Government's own programme for Government commitments. Never mind what the science demands, which is a lot more than that. Empty promises is all the Government has. Therefore, I salute those who take action, engage in civil disobedience, to highlight that. But they should not be criminalised for their action. As the Deputy will be fully aware, and as I have already stated, the right to protest peacefully is enshrined in the Constitution, and it is protected. And on Garda Síochána takes a human rights-led approach to any protest situation, and seeks to uphold and protect the right of freedom of assembly and to protest. But in doing so, also oppose the law and protecting both the public and the businesses when those protests are being carried out. That balance is always taken, but the primary protection is the Constitution, and that is there. And again, I cannot comment on any particular case. Thank you very much.