Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 623: To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality his views on reforming sentencing guidelines for the Judiciary to allow for multiple life sentences to be awarded for multiple murders in view of a recent documentary (details supplied); his further views on the introduction of a tariff system to accompany sentencing as exists in the UK whereby those convicted of murder or multiple murders must serve a set amount of time before applying for parole; and if he will properly resource the criminal injuries tribunal which is unable to make rulings in a timely fashion. [22966/11]

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to inform the Deputy that judges are independent in the matter of sentencing as they are in other matters concerning the exercise of judicial functions, subject only to the Constitution and the law. Insofar as the role of the Houses of the Oireachtas is concerned, the traditional approach to sentencing is to lay down the maximum penalty and for a court, having considered all the circumstances of the case, to impose an appropriate penalty up to that maximum. The Deputy will be aware however that there are a small number of particularly serious offences, such as murder and drugs and firearm misuse where mandatory sentencing is required under statute.

The judiciary has also, under the current Chief Justice, voluntarily established a committee to oversee the development of an electronic system which will collate information on the range of sentences and other penalties that have been imposed for particular types of offences across court jurisdictions. The resulting website, the Irish Sentencing Information System (ISIS) became operational as a pilot in August 2010. This publicly accessible resource includes statistics on sentencing, synopses of relevant court judgments and access to a database on actual sentences imposed in various crimes and cases. It provides a qualitative overview and a snapshot in time of how the courts treat various offences, who committed them and the circumstances in which they took place. It also provides references to leading cases on sentencing, summaries of particular judgments of the Court of Criminal Appeal in the area of sentencing law and links to the judgments of that court and academic materials on the subject of sentencing. In my view this website has the potential in time to be a valuable tool not only for members of the judiciary but also for lawyers, researchers and those of us concerned with the needs of victims and their families. I understand that ISIS will be evaluated after it has been operating for some time.

With specific regard to a sentence of life imprisonment, this means that the prisoner is subject to that sentence for the rest of his or her life. Such prisoners have no right to be released at any stage. Imposing multiple life sentences does not increase the severity of the sanction and has no effect in practice or law. While a prisoner who has been given a life sentence may apply for some form of temporary release to the Parole Board, should this be granted he or she remains subject to the original sentence and can be recalled to prison at any stage. Issues such as the gravity of the crime and the danger to the public posed by the individual would obviously be taken into consideration before any decision to grant temporary release is made. There is no automatic right to temporary release and prisoners who have committed particularly grievous crimes and continue to pose a threat will be kept in custody indefinitely.

On the subject of the introduction of tariffs on prison sentences, it has not been the practice of this State to operate such a system. The term "tariff" is normally used to describe the minimum amount of time an offender should spend in prison as decreed by the Courts. Such a system allows no flexibility or acknowledgment of, for example, mitigating factors such as a particular commitment by a prisoner to rehabilitation that might warrant a shorter time in prison. Nor does it allow for any acknowledgment of the fact that offences and the circumstances giving rise to them can vary. Likewise, fixed sentences for certain offences such as 25 years for murder, restrict the discretion of the State to acknowledge differing factors prior to, and after, the commission of the offence, such as, for instance public safety in the context of the release of a prisoner. Even in the UK, for example, where such a tariff system operates, life sentence prisoners do not automatically receive parole on the expiry of their tariff. Instead, their release is a matter for the Parole Board who may decide that detention beyond the tariff is required.

The Deputy might also be interested to note that the subject of criminal sanctions, including sentencing guidelines, has been a key component in the White Paper on Crime process which my Department has been engaged in since 2009. It was addressed specifically in a consultation seminar held last year and was part of a discussion document and a call for written submissions. A wide range of detailed submissions was received in response to the discussion document and a report on these submissions, along with a summary of the consultation meeting, was published last year. These reports are available on my Department's website (www.justice.ie). The input received will feed into the overall White Paper process and will provide a comprehensive framework for future crime policy in the form of a National Anti-Crime strategy.

Finally, I wish to inform the Deputy that I am satisfied that the Criminal Injuries Tribunal does provide decisions to applicants more quickly, and without the need for expensive legal representation, than similar claims in the Courts.