After being drummed out by the constituents of Fingal, in part no doubt through his doctrinaire support of mass migration, former Minister of State Joe O’Brien returned to NGOland with a new gig heading up the Irish Council of Civil Liberties (ICCL).
Financed almost exclusively by foreign patrons, the ICCL earned its civil society stripes following its foundation by former President Mary Robinson Council campaigning on issues such as divorce and contraception. Through its accrued cultural brownie points the Council got its paws on the levers of state throughout the 2000s and 2010s thanks to cash injections from master philanthropist Chuck Feeney by way of his Atlantic Philanthropies network.
Existing at the perfect goldilocks zone between hard left activism and big money the ICCL has its handprints on nearly every piece of so-called progressive legislation using its human rights veneer as an icebreaker. Ranging from national security, Gardai reform, tech policy to naturally enough pushing open borders there is hardly anything ICCL doesn’t touch at an Oireachtas or even EU level.
The Burkean notes of a new internal division within the ICCL ‘Enforce’ tailormade to lobby Big Tech in Dublin against what the Council refers to as ‘authoritarianism.’
Ignominiously quiet during the COVID years bar token statements when the Council’s civil society remit was arguably most needed nevermind being lockstep with the government when it comes to mass migration and hate speech legislation, the MO of the Enforce division is to fight the “algorithmic assault” on European democracy through lobbying and advocacy.
For you and I that translates as one thing and one thing only. As liberalism falters in Ireland and the world over the ICCL wants control of tech platforms to manage dissent.
Already, ENFORCE has pushed Ireland’s first-ever GDPR-based class action against Microsoft over data practices, signalling its ambition to transform ICCL from a civil liberties group into a player in Europe’s regulatory enforcement regime. Please note, despite the pretences of combatting Big Tech on data management these cases primarily serve as legalistic sticks to whip platforms into shape.
ICCL is recognised as one of two “qualified entities” under Ireland’s implementation of the Representative Actions Act, giving it institutional power to bring claims on behalf of groups. This status alone elevates ENFORCE from a typical NGO into a semi-state actor in legal enforcement
O’Brien’s move from party politics to this new enforcement role mirrors a broader shift: as street-level activism loses traction, Ireland’s NGO class is embedding itself inside regulatory frameworks. For the open borders left, the fight is no longer about rallies but about direct access to Brussels, Dublin, and Silicon Valley’s moderation boards.
An Immigration Council of Ireland stalwart (itself another Chuck Fenney cutout) O’Brien was noted in Fingal not just for his penchant for replacement migration but active role in deplatforming efforts, most notably contra Gemma O’Doherty in Ballbriggan in 2019.
More likely to be skinned alive in Finglas today considering the zeitgeist shift on the migration issue Enforce plans to bring Big Tech to heel through strategic litigation, slotting into an enforcement role when it comes to content moderation and no doubt pressing its connections in Brussels and DC.
Joining O’Brien in this venture is Foxglove Legal (UK) a British campaigning group hovering around the UK Home Office which prefers to get its cheques signed from the Soros network and Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.
Already airing grievances against the populist right at the EU Parliament and wading firmly into the realm of national security and counterintelligence by way of remarks by Dr Johnny Ryan ENFORCE is championing internet clampdowns by way of child safety following on from the Starmerite playbook.
Even going so far as to warn against threats to NATO unity in an open letter against Trumpism, even passive watchers can’t help but marvel at the sheer mission creep of the ICCL. From contraceptives to handholding Big Tech in censoring democratic concerns on mass migration, the ICCL through its funding, ideology and activism has mutated into a lobbying monster at the heart of the Irish NGO establishment.
Dublin’s unique status as headquarters for Facebook, Google, Microsoft and TikTok makes Ireland the natural staging ground for the EU’s censorship infrastructure. Under the Digital Services Act, Irish regulators effectively govern the content policies of platforms used by hundreds of millions across Europe.
ENFORCE slots directly into this environment, not as a neutral observer but as an NGO designed to shape the rules, pressure companies, and litigate until compliance is secured. Symbolically, it plants the civil liberties flag on the very machinery that decides what speech circulates and what speech is throttled.
ENFORCE is more than an internal ICCL division: it is the spearpoint of a transnational ecosystem. ICCL itself has long drawn on philanthropic funding, while its partner Foxglove Legal is bankrolled by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust and the Sigrid Rausing Trust. These networks converge in Brussels, where NGO voices are amplified in legislative committees and working groups.
The effect is to hardwire philanthropic priorities into European law. What once looked like grassroots human rights activism now functions as the operating software of an international censorship complex functioning right on Dublin’s doorstep.
If the ICCL once fancied itself as Ireland’s ACLU, ENFORCE now casts it as something closer to Brussels’ hall monitor—clip-board in hand, checking speech for contraband thoughts. That may win it applause in NGO boardrooms and Eurocrat corridors, but it leaves a deeper question hanging: when the guardians of liberty become the subcontractors of censorship, who will be left to guard the guardians?
Share this: