120. Deputy Ruth Coppinger asked the Minister for Defence if she will examine extending the EU victims directive (details supplied) to cases that are prosecuted by the military police or the Director of Military Prosecutions; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [54260/26]

Sentiment score: -0.18

When is the victims of crime Act 2017 going to apply the Army? The Women of Honour have pushed for change so that if there is abuse within the Army there will, we hope, be mechanisms to deal with that, but what about women who are abused by Army personnel who are not in the Army? The Minister knows of this case and I am not going to go into any names or details but it shines a light on how we have a situation where a woman who was abused by an Army officer - and potentially another woman as well - has not been able since 2022 to get information on her case. Nothing is being done by the secretive military tribunals that are operating in the Army.

Sentiment score: -0.43

I have very little time left, but I want to put on record that the woman in question was abused by an Army officer using military equipment and surveillance technology, which is extremely scary. She made a complaint, which has never been pursued. She found out that a court martial was taking place but it was about smaller charges that were nothing to do with the woman or the other woman either. The feeling of the victim was that this was being facilitated, like an organised pay off of this predator. This may not be true but that was her feeling. Is this officer retired? Is he eligible to retire? Does he have a clean record? Does he have a pension? Will we end up seeing him working in Leinster House? The victim's belief is that the military prosecutor has evidence of a very dangerous man but for some reason, the Army does not seem to be concerned because it has not prosecuted him on those charges. Why would the Army not want to prosecute somebody? Are we at war or something? Why is it so secretive? Why does the Minister have no jurisdiction over what is going on in the Army? I see a letter arrived a day before this question was due in which the Minister says she has no role here. This is just outrageous.

Sentiment score: -0.16

This man said of one woman that he would attach her to a concrete block. He said of another that he would set fire to her. Should this person be getting a pay off from the Army? No, of course, he should not. He should have been put on trial. We have to end a situation where these military prosecutions are secret and where the Minister for Defence does not even have the right to intervene. In a letter to the victim, the Minister said that such matters were internal to the Defence Forces and that she had no statutory role and she was considering what options she had. I trust the Minister will look into this, because I know she has an interest in gender-based violence from her previous role. She is the Minister who can do this and can apply the victims' directive. This officer was involved in a GoFundMe campaign, where rapists' names were used as a joke by the various men who contributed to it. I do not think rape is funny and the Army should not either. That GoFundMe campaign was left up for a long time. Why is the Army a law unto itself in relation to gender-based violence? We know it will deal with soldiers but when women are abused the Army has authority over people. It has uniforms, power, weaponry and surveillance to abuse women. Women outside the Army should be protected from people in the Army and should have the same rights as any other woman.

Sentiment score: -0.17