andMr. Deasy asked the Minister for Justice if he is satisfied that the system of issuing warrants for the monitoring of telephone calls is in conformity with the standards laid down by the European Court of Human Rights in their judgment on German law in this respect in 1978 when the court indicated that certain minimum criteria were essential; if he will indicate whether such criteria are in existence in this country; and, if so, whether it is possible to obtain details.

The procedure for the issue of warrants by the Minister for Justice for the monitoring of telephone calls has been outlined to the House on a number of occasions — warrants are issued only when this is necessary for security purposes or for the prevention or detection of serious crime, information as to which could be got in no other way. They have been issued by every Minister for Justice with the knowledge and approval of every Government since the foundation of the State.

As recently as 28 February this year in the course of replying to supplementary questions I indicated to the House that it would not be a matter for me to express views as to what might or might not be in line with the views of the European Court.

I am disappointed at the Minister's reply. Are the criteria referred to in part two of the question in existence and available to the House, that is the criteria on which warrants may be issued on request to him? Secondly, does he accept that where there is telephone tapping it is undertaken only after warrants have been obtained or does he refute categorically allegations made in the current issue of Magill? I should be grateful for two clear answers to those questions.

To take the last question first, I should hate to make a practice of having to refute everything that appears in Magill. However, I refute totally the allegations to which the Deputy is referring.

That is more than somebody else might do.

Regarding the first part of the question, I have indicated clearly the criteria that apply in regard to the issuing of warrants by the Minister for Justice. Warrants are issued only in cases in which there is no other way of getting information that is required for security purposes or for the prevention or detection of serious crime. In relation to an application from the Garda, there must be a certificate from the Commissioner or from his deputy that both conditions are fulfilled, namely, that the warrant is required for security purposes or for the prevention or detection of serious crime and that the information cannot be obtained in any other way. If an application were to be made on behalf of Military Intelligence, the certificate as to the need for a warrant would have to be signed by the Director of Military Intelligence and would have to be backed personally by the Minister for Defence before I would issue a warrant.

Are copies of the criteria available to Members of the House?

I have outlined what the criteria are and these are the only ones. On the question as to whether there is interference with telephones apart from eavesdropping on foot of a warrant, the answer is a definite "no".

The Minister is saying, therefore, that the allegations contained in the article referred to are, to his knowledge, without a shred of foundation.

I have said that but I might add that if I were in Opposition I should need a magazine of better substance than Magill on which to base serious parliamentary questions.

I shall not comment on that, but may we take it that the Minister is clear as to there being no basis for the allegations in that magazine regarding interference with telephones.

That is so.

I accept totally the official position as set out by the Minister but is he certain that there is no unofficial tapping of telephones, that, for instance, there is no tapping of the telephones of Deputies of the House or of persons associated with them? May we have a guarantee that our telephones are free from any such interference?

The Deputy is well aware of what both my responsibilities and the responsibilities of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs are in this area. I have told him what my responsibilities are and his colleagues have tabled questions to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs in regard to his area of responsibility so there should be no doubt in anybody's mind as to the position.

Would the Minister assure the House that there is no reason for suspecting that there is any unofficial tapping of telephones?

I am telling the Deputy that so far as I am concerned there in no unofficial interference with telephones and that that will continue to be the position.

With the consent of the House the Minister may take the next question which is the last one to him.