I am concerned that some public commentary, relating to actions taken by me regarding Frank Connolly's role in the Centre for Public Investigation, is informed by a fundamental misunderstanding of the proper role of the Minister for Justice.
The Minister for Justice is, in Irish law, the member of government given special responsibility, along with the Minister for Defence, for the security of the State and the prevention of subversion.
An Garda Síochána, established by law as the national police force, is also one of the State's security and intelligence services. It is given responsibility in this area, which is by no means confined to investigation with a view to criminal prosecution at the suit of the DPP under Article 38 of the Constitution. Their security role is also pre-emptive and preventative, not merely investigative.
It is simply wrong to imagine that the security of the State falls to be defended solely through the process of Criminal Justice, in accordance with the requirements of Article 38 (relating to due process, proof beyond reasonable doubt and judicial adjudication).
While the criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt on the basis of admissible evidence is appropriate to the trial of offenders under Article 38, that standard is not applicable to many other aspects of public and private affairs.
In particular, in matters relating to the protection of the State's security and the prevention of subversion of democracy, which sometimes involves making the public aware of underlying facts and allegations, it would be very wrong of a Minister for Justice to fail to take action or to speak out on the sole basis that the subject matter was incapable or unlikely to be established beyond reasonable doubt in the criminal justice process.
There are public as well as private rights and duties in our Constitutional order. And it is the clear duty of the holders of governmental office to balance these rights and duties and to act - sometimes pre-emptively - to protect the authority of the State mentioned in Article 40.6.
When there are substantial reasons to believe that a threat to the State's democracy and authority exists, it is the right and duty of a Minister for Justice to act in the interests of the State. The rights of a citizen to his or her good name must always be carefully balanced against the public's right to be protected from subversion. The fundamental duty of loyalty to the state involves Ministers and private citizens alike.
I, and other members of the Government have spoken clearly about the dangers of subversive activity and, on occasion, about subversive criminality. We have done so because it is vitally important in a democracy that every aspect of public affairs should be open to scrutiny, not just those aspects which are governmental.
The public should expect nothing less from its government.
December 11th, 2005