Mr. Justice Michael Reilly:

I am pleased to come before the joint committee to give my views - they are my personal views and not representative of anyone else's thinking - on a possible worthwhile initiative, namely, discussing the concept of community courts in an Irish context. First, I congratulate the Chairman on taking such an avid interest in this matter. I also pay tribute to the Minister who, when publishing the last of my reports, on the Dóchas Centre, made significant comments on his desire to see change. I have no doubt that there is such a desire.

I would like to share with the committee my experiences in the criminal justice system over more than 45 years, first, as a solicitor, then, from 1982 to 2008, as a judge and for the past six years as Inspector of Prisons. I will then try to place in context community courts in 2014 in the criminal justice system.

The Minister knows as well as I do, if not better, that for countless generations the criminal justice system stood still. Judges had very few options, but they did not need them because they could imprison or fine people or let them off with a caution. In other words, they could apply the Probation Act. In the mid-1980s the concept of community service was introduced. This was the first time in this jurisdiction that offenders were obliged to make some form of reparation and it worked. As a result, judges had a further sentencing option. Even in the 1980s there was a clear distinction between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. What was unacceptable was criminal behaviour, in respect of which the forces of law and order could bring offenders before the courts to be dealt with. At the time the criminal justice system was adequately equipped to deal with whatever came before it as a result of the limited range of options available. While they were limited, they were adequate.

Towards the end of the 1990s Ireland, in common with other countries, experienced a huge change that had been brought about by the abuse of drugs and the consumption of alcohol and nobody knew what to do about it. As judges, we were seeking guidance because it was obvious that the criminal justice with which I, among others, had grown up was ill-equipped to deal with certain of the new challenges in the aftermath of the advent of drugs. At that point the drugs court was established. This was a modern, innovative approach to endeavour to deal with the drugs issue. Those who established and operated the court deserve great credit. However, it could only deal with one aspect of the problem. The drugs scourge brought all sorts of other problems with it.

It has been apparent to me, as I am sure it has to all of society, that the scale of the drugs problem has brought with it other difficulties. I refer to people shoplifting and petty thieving in order to fund the purchase of drugs. In addition, there is begging on the streets. I am aware, however, that not all begging is drug-related. There is also anti-social behaviour on the streets which comes from a culture of drug taking and impacts on the quality of life of ordinary people. Then there is the homelessness associated with this chaotic life. I could go on in this regard.

What do we do? We could introduce severe penalties and mandatory sentences, build extra prisons and increase the strength of the Garda in order to ensure all of the people whom society believes to be a nuisance could be brought to court and taken out of circulation by being imprisoned. That might be easy were it not for the fact that 99.9% of people who are imprisoned leave prison at some stage. Most of them leave after quite a short time and the entire cycle begins again. When these unfortunate individuals come to court, the judge will be told of their sad history and background. On numerous occasions I have been asked to direct that a psychiatric or psychological report or assessment of an individual be produced before imposing sentence. One must then ask where such a report or assessment should be procured. If someone's doctor wants to obtain an expert opinion, he or she will send him or her to the relevant expert, probably in a hospital. However, we do not find them there. Therefore, what do we do? What option do I, as a judge, have? My only option is to send the person to prison. Why would one send a person to prison in order to obtain a doctor's report? Would it not be better to ask an expert who is available to the court to produce such a report? In every single case in which I requisitioned a report, it recommended options. However, the option of prison was never recommended. Why then should the individual involved have been sent to prison in the first instance? Similarly, if a person has an addiction to drugs or alcohol, as a judge I may want to know what options are open to me. I know what I can do, namely, send the individual to prison and he or she will receive certain help there. If he or she has underlying problems, however, the three or six-month sentence I hand down might not be sufficient to allow him or her to address them in prison. If I seek advice, I doubt that it would be recommended that the person involved be sent to prison.

This is where the concept of community courts first came into my mind and I have been reading about it. It is a new concept, but it could quite easily sit side by side with the existing system. I have seen these courts in operation in Red Hook in Brooklyn, Midtown Manhattan, Philadelphia and Liverpool. As members are probably aware, I chaired a sub-committee of the National Crime Council which examined community courts in an Irish context. Its report which dates from 2007 is freely available. As Inspector of Prisons, I have also seen at first hand the plight of those with mental disorders, addiction, family and housing problems. These individuals, as a result of their difficulties, have ended up in prison. If they had received help and judges had options, they might not have been imprisoned. It is probably fair to say that if people in society need help and receive it, a high proportion accept that help and usually change as a result. We know this from everyday life. A community court-type system would be a place in which that change could start. I have listened to many people who have talked about this complex issue. It is one that needs a great deal of consideration.

There are many players who are important in this matter. These players range from the Judiciary to the ordinary person who really has no qualification but who may be a helper in the court and befriends an individual who comes before it. Community courts will involve an element of community service work, but that is something of which we are all aware.

It will take a reforming mindset to take the step of looking again at the concept of community courts. As there are so many necessary elements and so many necessary players in this, it would be wrong for any one of those players to decide they were the most important. It must be a collaborative approach among everybody. In that regard, I welcome the initiative taken by Dublin City Business Association in starting the discussion in the open. I can elaborate on any of this at a later stage.