Dáil Éireann

Tuesday, 14 June 2016
_________________________________

“That Dáil Éireann resolves that sections 2 to 4, 6 to 12, 14 and 17 of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 (No. 39 of 1998) shall continue in operation for the period beginning on 30 June 2016 and ending on 29 June 2017.”

“That Dáil Éireann resolves that section 8 of the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009 (No. 32 of 2009) shall continue in operation for the period beginning on 30 June 2016 and ending on 29 June 2017.”

_________________________________


Statement by the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality, Ms Frances Fitzgerald T.D. 

____________________


CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY

I move the Motions, a Cheann Comhairle.

1.  Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act 1998

The House will recall that the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 was enacted following the Omagh bombing in which 29 innocent people lost their lives at the hands of terrorists.  That appalling act of inhumanity lives in all our memories and our sympathies remain with the victims and their families.

The 1998 Act was a robust response by the Oireachtas that made a series of amendments to the Offences against the State Acts to enhance the fight against terrorism.  Principally, the Act provided for:

That atrocity demanded a clear and resolute response from the State in defence of the desire of the vast majority of law-abiding people on this island to live their lives in peace.

Section 18 of the 1998 Act, as amended by section 37 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999, provides that sections 2 to 4, 6 to 12, 14 and 17 must be renewed by the Oireachtas at specified intervals if they are to remain in force.  By virtue of resolutions passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas in June 2015, these sections were continued in force for a period of 12 months.

Prior to moving any motion for renewal, the Act requires that I lay before the Oireachtas a report on the operation of the relevant provisions.  The present report covers the period from 1 June 2015 to 31 May 2016 and was laid before the House on 10 June 2016.

Given the time available this evening, I will not go through all of the relevant sections in detail.  The Report, based on information provided by the Garda Authorities, sets out the numbers of instances in which the various sections in question have been used over the period.  The Report also includes a table showing comparative usage for each of the years since the Act came into operation.

The Report indicates that two sections – namely sections 6 and 12 – were not used during the reporting period in question.  However, it should not be inferred from this that these provisions are in some way redundant or unnecessary as the usage of the different sections can vary from year to year.

It is the clear view of the Garda Commissioner that the Act continues to be a most important tool in ongoing efforts in the fight against terrorism.  The Garda Authorities have stated that the provisions of the Act are used regularly, which is evident from the Report that I have laid before the House.  They are, in short, a necessary legislative support in the fight against terrorism.

The fact is that there remains a real and lethal threat on this island from those so-called ‘dissident’ paramilitary groups that are fundamentally opposed to peace.  There has been and there will be no let up in actions to tackle these groups.

My decisions in respect of bringing the second Special Criminal Court into operation are in response to this threat.  It is now up and running and it underlines my determination to deal with serious crime affecting the security of the State. 

The threat level in Northern Ireland is severe – the appalling murder of Northern Ireland Prison Officer Adrian Ismay earlier this year highlights the morally vacant and nihilistic path that these groups follow in direct opposition to the democratic wishes and efforts of the majority on this island.

The Garda authorities work tirelessly and in co-operation with their counterparts in the PSNI in countering the activities of these paramilitary organisations, and they deserve credit for their ongoing work.  Combating the security threat is a key priority for me and the additional funding that I have secured for the Garda Vote this year will go in part towards support for measures against terrorism. 

The Government and I are determined that these groups will not prevail and I know that we have the support of all right-thinking people in this House.  It would be a happy day when legislative provisions such as these were no longer needed.  The sad truth is that that day is not yet upon us.

2.  Section 8 of the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009

Turning to the second motion, a Cheann Comhairle, this motion proposes the continuation in force for another year of section 8 of the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009.  This section provides for a limited number of serious, organised crime offences to be tried in the Special Criminal Court, thus removing the possibility of jury tampering or the intimidation of jurors or potential jurors.

The offences in question are set out in Part 7 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 and they are:

The 2009 Act makes these scheduled offences for the purposes of Part V of the Offences Against the State Act 1939.   While this means that the Special Criminal Court will hear trials for these offences, the Director of Public Prosecutions retains her power to direct that the offences should be tried in the ordinary courts.

In order to assist the House in its consideration, section 8, subsection (6) provides that I must prepare a report, which shall be laid before both Houses, on the operation of the section in the period under report.  That Report, covering the period from 1 June 2015 to 31 May 2016 was laid before the House on 10 June.

Section 8 was not used during the period in question; indeed, it has not been used since 2009.   This does not, however, invalidate the reasoning for having such a provision available for use in the appropriate circumstances nor does it diminish its potential value bringing organised criminals to justice. 

In fact, the operation of this provision to date highlights the considered approach of the DPP in using her discretion to direct that cases would be tried in the ordinary courts where it is possible to do so.  This is proof positive of the balance that has been struck with this provision – a robust but nonetheless proportionate power.  Critics of it might do well to bear that in mind. 

In the period under report, there were a total of 17 arrests under two of the four offences covered by section 8 – 7 arrests under Section 72 and a further 10 under Section 73.  Sections 71A and 76 were not used in the reporting period in question.  Of course, there is a variety of other provisions of the criminal law that have been and are used against gangs.  My Department is currently examining whether there are other changes to the law that might be made to tackle these gangs.  I will be bringing forward shortly changes to the law to strengthen the powers of CAB in respect of seizing the proceeds of crime.

None of us can be under any illusion about the danger to society from organised crime.  Recent gang-related murders in the Dublin region put into stark relief the utter disregard of organised criminals for human life and the rule of law.  Counteracting this danger presents very real challenges for the State.  However, I can assure the House that this Government is fully committed to providing An Garda Síochána with the necessary resources to confront these criminal thugs and to bring them to justice.

To this end, as I have said, I secured substantial additional funding of €55 million for An Garda Síochána for the remainder of 2016 that will, among other things, support the necessary activities to target gang-related crime.

The Garda Commissioner has made clear to me her view that this provision will be required for some time to come and, as Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality I must have the utmost regard for her analysis.

Trial by jury is the standard for our system and should be preserved to the greatest extent possible.  However, none of us can afford to ignore the threat to the rule of law from violent, organised criminals who will stop at nothing to protect themselves and their profits.  We are duty bound as legislators to ensure that we respond robustly but proportionately to that threat.  

A Cheann Comhairle, I commend these motions to the House.

_______________________