Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I oppose this amendment absolutely. It is critical in decision-making that one knows the nature and gravity of the offence. When I consider the cases that have come to me, I cannot think of one in which, when making a decision on release into society, I would not want to know the details on the nature and gravity of the offence or the risk to society. I am referring to the exclusion of the nature and gravity of the offence from the list of relevant material that the board should endeavour to take into account under section 18.

Amendment 59 would make similar provision with respect to section 20. The information in question is information that the parole board currently considers and information that parole boards traditionally considered. To exclude the nature and gravity of the offence would be to exclude fundamental information that is essential. The nature and gravity of the offence - the particular circumstances in which the murder or rape took place - must be known if one is making a decision on releasing somebody into society. One also needs to consider a range of other issues. When one examines the guiding principles in the Bill, one notes this is one of a whole series. It is stated the board shall endeavour to take into consideration all relevant available information, including the stated reasons and recommendations of the sentencing judge. This gives a lot of information about the context of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the person whose parole is being considered. If the offence was committed when the prisoner was 19 and he is now 40, one needs to know what his behaviour has been like in prison, in addition to his attitude, engagement with the alcohol and drugs programmes and his engagement within prison. One must also consider information from the trial or sentencing process. Therefore, there is a long list of guiding principles. The one in question is one of them but it is a very important one that should be left in the legislation. In view of this I do not believe the amendment is a good one.

On amendment No. 54, I have already outlined my concerns with respect to the board taking into consideration an offender's plea at trial. Moreover, I believe there should be sufficient information in the stated reasons and recommendations of the sentencing judge which are to be considered by the parole board without making specific provision to consider the offender's plea at trial. As I said, section 19 provides that the parole board may grant release if the person being considered for parole will not present an undue risk to society and the release of the prisoner will facilitate reintegration. I do not see how the nature of the offender's plea would inform either of these considerations. We have discussed this.

I support amendment No. 55 as an alternative to amendments Nos. 56 and 57. This amendment will require the board to assess the extent to which the person whose parole is being considered has been rehabilitated and is capable of being reintegrated into society. That addresses the matters contained in the subsequent amendments from Deputies Daly and Wallace. These are matters that are central to the way in which the board does its work at present. I refer to all the issues associated with the potential for rehabilitation.

In Ireland, the average life sentence served is approximately 18 years. It is very clear that, in this country, we assess all those issues. In America, for example, there are much longer sentences and one does not have an opportunity to rehabilitate. We all know the consequences of that. We have a good system but all the various factors need to be taken into account. One obviously has to focus on rehabilitation but, from what I have seen, I am very confident that it is fully taken into account.

On a more general point, sections 18 and 19 would benefit from further review as there is some overlap in the guiding principles under section 18 and the factors to which the board may have regard in deciding on whether to make a parole order under section 19. For instance, section 19(1)(a) provides that the parole board may grant parole if, in its opinion, the person being considered for parole will not present an undue risk to society and the release of the person will facilitate the reintegration of that person into society. To take up Deputy Daly's point, reintegration is one of the factors to which the board may have regard, as set out under subsection (2) of section 18.

With respect to the drafting of section 18, consideration will also need to be given to the numbering. There may be some stand-alone subsections. This, however, can be accounted for in any amendments to sections 18 and 19 to bring them further into line with each other.