The issue of "extraordinary rendition" has been raised with the US authorities by the Government on at least eight occasions, according to a document published in the Irish Human Rights Commission report on the subject, published yesterday.
In its review/report on extraordinary rendition, the commission published a summary note provided to it by the Department of Foreign Affairs on the diplomatic assurances received by the Government from the United States authorities.
This includes references to discussions between the department and the US embassy in Dublin between the end of 2003 and September 2004 on the topic.
Also included are firm assurances directly from Washington in October 2004; a meeting in the embassy in Dublin in November that year at which it was stated that no US aircraft involved in the illegal transfer of prisoners had landed in Shannon, and further assurances from the US embassy following inter-agency consultations on the matter.
In addition, specific reassurances were received from US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and US president George Bush at separate meetings with Minister for Foreign Affairs Dermot Ahern and the Taoiseach respectively, in December, 2005, on March 16th, 2006, and on March 17th, this year.
The matter was raised with US ambassador Thomas Foley by Dermot Ahern at a meeting in November 2006 and it continues to be raised at regular meetings, the note states.
Correspondence between the Irish Human Rights Commission and the Government is also published, showing the deep differences between them on this subject.
In a lengthy commentary on the draft review/report, the political director of the Department of Foreign Affairs, Rory Fitzpatrick, says: "I regret to say that we do not believe that the body of the draft review adequately reflects the position of the Government as expressed in our extensive dialogue on these key issues.
"Nor does the draft review, in our view, fairly reflect the extensive action taken by Minister Ahern to express at the international level Ireland's total opposition to extraordinary rendition," writes Mr Fitzpatrick.
The commentary continues: "It is our view that the commission's interpretation of the law relating to diplomatic assurances is overly broad, in that it seeks to extract from the jurisprudence general principles that are not established in law."
The commentary also takes issue with the commission's interpretation of the obligation to ensure that a person is not being "rendered" through its territory, pointing out that it must have "serious reasons" to believe that this is happening.
It states that the assurances received from the US authorities are "specific, factual and relate to the very existence of such persons".
Referring to an inspection regime, the department states: "We do not believe that the introduction of such a regime is necessary, likely to be useful or justified by any reasonable assessment of the facts and probabilities of the situation as they are known to us.
"Nor are we aware of any such regime in operation elsewhere."