asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if, on the basis of the information available to him, he has satisfied himself that the imprisonment of George Calciu in Romania and Vojtech Srna in Czechoslovakia for religious practice is contrary to the provisions of the Helsinki Final Act of which Ireland. Romania and Czechoslovakia are signatories; if so, if he will make diplomatic representations on their behalf, if not, why; if he has made representations on behalf of any people similarly imprisoned under the provisions of the Final Act since he took office and, if so, if he will give details.

This question relates to the implementation of the Helsinki Final Act which was signed by 35 Heads of Government of Europe and North America including Ireland, Romania and Czechoslovakia, in 1975. The Final Act has two main elements. First of all, it contains a series of ten principles to guide relations between states, one of which is the principle of respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief. It also contains a series of agreed measures designed to improve co-operation between the participating states. Although the Final Act is not a legal instrument, it is a political commitment which the participating states solemnly reaffirmed at the end of the Belgrade follow-up meeting last year.

From the outset the Irish Government have attached great importance to the implementation of the Final Act and especially the observance of its human rights principle. On many occasions, both publicly and privately, we have stressed the view that if the process begun by the Final Act is to be effective it must be based not only on the relaxation of tensions and growing co-operation between states but also on respect of human rights within states.

Certain individuals have been mentioned whose treatment, according to my information, is contrary to the provisions of the Final Act. I recognise—and I believe that the Deputy will accept this—that inevitably there are limits to the extent to which a country such as ours can make effective representations to other countries with very different social systems on issues which do not involve our own citizens. However, I can assure him that in consultation with our partners in the European Community we have on numerous occasions made our views known on these issues and the Governments concerned are in no doubt about our concern. Beyond referring to this clear public position we have taken, I do not think it would be appropriate for me to go into detail on other representations which might be made in particular cases.

The Deputy will be aware that a further CSCE follow-up meeting will take place in Madrid next year in order to examine the extent to which the undertakings arising from the Final Act have been carried out and to discuss measures for improving implementation and developing the scope of the co-operation between the participating states. In the run-up to the Madrid meeting Ireland will continue to press for full implementation of all aspects of the Final Act and in particular its human rights and related humanitarian provisions.

Is the Minister aware that Fr. Srna was sentenced to one year in jail for saying Mass without authorisation in Czechoslovakia and that Fr. Calciu was sentenced for operating an orthodox religious seminary in Romania? In view of the fact that I drew these cases to the Minister's attention some months ago, has the Minister made any representations in either of these cases and, if not, why not?

We received a letter from the Deputy who has shown concern for the two individuals mentioned. I would assure the Deputy that we made representations in relation to the cases and are continuing to do so. We will continue to do so and will keep the Deputy informed. The Deputy will have received a reply from the Department in which it was clearly stated that with regard to the specific cases of the two gentlemen referred to it appeared from the information available that their treatment was contrary to the Final Act's principles on human rights and fundamental freedoms which includes the right of free expression of a religious belief and so on.

It was clear to me from the reply that I received that no representations had been made at that time in respect of these two cases. It now appears from what the Minister is saying that representations were made. Will the Minister say categorically if diplomatic representations were made in respect of these two priests who were imprisoned for normal religious activity?

Representations are being made in relation to the specific cases the Deputy has indicated and there are also other representations in relation to the general treatment of the Charter 77 people.

Would it be a good idea if the Department of Foreign Affairs had a small section specifically devoted to watching the human rights dimensions of the CSCE and to spotting well ahead of time possible opportunities for making our country's feelings felt on such matters?

A number of sections in the Department of Foreign Affairs are engaged in monitoring human rights. What the Deputy is seeking is a specific section of the Department to monitor the human rights matter.

It does not arise out of this question.

It is a very good idea. We will have it examined.

Has any response been received to the representations made?

No formal response has been received.

Is it usual that they should be ignored?

What influence have we with the Governments of Czechoslovakia and Romania? Have we any influence at all with them?

We have a very strong moral role to play in world diplomacy. As an independent nation with no colonial past, we can be seen as being neutral in regard to world affairs. I should imagine that our role in the Nine, and our present Presidency, would give us a fair bit of clout in relation to the matters raised on this question.

Whom do we contact in a case, like this? Is it the Foreign Minister of Romania or the Foreign Minister of Czechoslovakia? How do we go about it?

That is a separate question.

Will the Minister ask his colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, to consider raising in Madrid the specific question of religious persecution as distinct from other forms of breaches of human rights as a special category of discrimination? I believe there are a number of categories under which human rights can be considered. I would ask the Minister to ensure that, without prejudice to any of the others, this should be mentioned specifically.

I will give the Deputy the undertaking that his request will be examined.

Whom do we contact in such cases?