Gript analysis of hundreds of submissions to the Government’s security consultation found more respondents wanted to keep the Triple Lock than remove it.
The findings come as the Government prepares to bring forward legislation within weeks to remove the policy, according to an Irish Times article published last week.
The Triple Lock requires approval from the Government, the Dáil, and the United Nations Security Council before more than 12 members of the Defence Forces can be deployed overseas on international missions.
A public consultation on International Security Policy was held by the Department of Foreign Affairs between May 31st and July 7th 2023. The consultation was intended to help inform the Consultative Forum on International Security Policy, which was established to discuss Ireland’s foreign, defence, and security policies.
Hundreds of submissions were received. Gript reviewed the responses individually, excluding submissions from politicians and political parties, as well as 78 responses which were unclear or where respondents indicated they did not know enough about the Triple Lock to express a view.
Of the remaining 622 submissions, 55.1% supported keeping the Triple Lock, 38.1% supported scrapping it, 3.5% favoured altering it without fully abolishing it, and 3.2% expressed mixed views or said it should be reviewed.
Twelve submissions came from organisations, including the Institute for International Criminal Investigations, the Jesuit Centre for Faith and Justice, the Department of Politics and Public Administration at the University of Limerick, the Dublin Ecofeminist Collective, Anti Imperialist Action Ireland, and the Centre for Military History and Strategic Studies at Maynooth University.
Many respondents who supported retaining the Triple Lock described it as an important safeguard against political decision-making in relation to military deployments.
“The triple lock system is there to prevent abuse of power from the political forces and ideologues,” one respondent said.
“It should not be amended in any way.”
Others suggested the policy should be strengthened rather than weakened.
“I would approve of a ‘Quadruple Lock’ that also required a successful referendum alongside the other requirements to ensure the Irish people are not dragged into conflict that is not in our interest,” one submission stated.
Another respondent argued that maintaining the existing system should be the minimum requirement.
“Maintaining the Triple Lock should be the bare minimum,” the respondent said.
“I would be interested to explore the possibility of further locks. Perhaps presidential approval, a civilian oversight board or a ballot of Defence Forces employees.”
Several submissions also linked the policy to broader concerns about checks and balances on government power.
“If the past few years have shown us anything, it is that checks and balances are needed,” one respondent wrote.
Others argued that the Triple Lock was introduced following public debate surrounding the Nice Treaty and should not be removed without a similar process.
“The ‘Triple Lock’ was introduced after the Nice Treaty was rejected in a referendum in 2001 to allay the Irish electorate’s fears that ‘Nice’ was a threat to our neutrality,” one submission stated.
“It is disingenuous of the Irish government to now look at removing or changing the Triple Lock without the same level of national discussion as was held before its introduction, followed by a referendum on Irish Neutrality.”
Respondents who favoured removing the Triple Lock generally argued that it limited Irish sovereignty and gave foreign powers influence over Irish military deployments.
Many pointed to the veto powers held by permanent members of the UN Security Council, including Russia and China, and argued that Ireland should not require approval from those states before participating in overseas missions.
Despite the consultation responses, the report on the forum and consultation produced following the process characterised the debate in different terms.
The October 2023 report to the Tánaiste read that: “The Triple Lock: the prevailing view is that it should be reconsidered.”
It also noted that many participants argued the mechanism represented an abdication of sovereignty and was no longer suitable in its current form.
“While there was not a consensus on this point, the preponderance of views, especially among the experts and practitioners, is that it is time for a reconsideration of the Triple Lock as it is no longer fit for purpose,” the report said.
It further stated that it would be “unwise” to take much from the consultation responses, as they are not necessarily reflective of public opinion.
“To state the obvious, it must be borne in mind that the submissions were not a random or representative sample of the population, rather the views of citizens engaged in these issues; therefore, it would be unwise to extrapolate from these views to the population-at-large.”
Last week, the Irish Times reported that the Government intends to move ahead with legislation to remove the Triple Lock mechanism.
According to the newspaper, Foreign Affairs and Defence Minister Helen McEntee is expected to bring the Defence (Amendment) Bill 2026 to Cabinet later this month.
The legislation would remove the requirement for UN Security Council approval before Irish troops can participate in overseas missions.
Ministers have argued that the existing arrangement leaves Ireland vulnerable to decisions taken by other countries and can prevent participation in peacekeeping and security operations.
The debate follows a broader political shift on the issue in recent years.
As previously reported by Gript, Taoiseach Micheál Martin described the Triple Lock as “the core of our neutrality” while speaking in the Dáil in 2013, accusing Fine Gael of having an “out-of-touch ideological obsession” for wanting to change it at the time.
“Earlier this year, Minister Shatter signalled that he would try to water down Ireland’s commitment to the Triple Lock, which is the core of our neutrality,” Martin said at the time.
“I and my party completely reject this.”
Speaking in the Dáil las year, however, Martin argued that the policy should be changed.
“The reason we have consistently said that the triple lock needs to change is that the powers on the Security Council should not be able to stop or veto Ireland’s participation in a peacekeeping mission,” he said.
“It is absolutely nothing to do with military neutrality as is asserted time and again in this House. Nothing.”
The Triple Lock has been in place since the early 2000s and forms part of the framework governing overseas military deployments by the Defence Forces.
The consultation on international security policy is not the only instance in which public submissions have diverged from subsequent Government policy. Gript previously reported that public consultations on the Family and Care referendums, hate speech legislation, and misinformation regulations also produced predominantly negative responses from individual participants, though the Government proceeded with each policy regardless.