Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman for giving me the opportunity to be here this morning as I am not a member of the committee and I thank the Commissioner and his team for coming in on this issue.

I raised the juvenile diversion programme in October 2016 in relation to a particular case that had come to me. I was assured at the time that there were no issues and that everything was being done appropriately and properly. The case I raised, and I raised it in the Chamber again recently, relates to a young girl who was the victim of a serious sexual assault. The perpetrators of that assault had been caught red handed on CCTV and had admitted what they had done. To the horror of the victim and her family, they were informed that the perpetrators had been issued with a caution and referred to the juvenile diversion programme. The family were not consulted or asked about this, merely told this is what had happened. The victim in this case has suffered greatly since then. She has had great difficulties in her life and has seen the culprits, who admitted the offence, continue with their lives largely uninhibited. The family feels very distressed and annoyed that this is the case.

In cases of serious sexual assault the youth diversion programme is not an appropriate mechanism and there should be very careful consideration before it might be thought of as appropriate. According to the Garda website, and elsewhere, before a young person is referred to this programme, he or she must take responsibility for his or her offending behaviour, must agree to be cautioned and, where appropriate, agree to a term of supervision. The Citizens Information website goes into much more detail on the juvenile diversion programme. I know that much of this was last updated in 2014, but it refers to the diversional programme having a conference where there would be a meeting with the family of the culprit including the officer involved and that they would discuss the situation and work out an action plan and so on. However, I hear from many people across the country that in practice, there is a caution and there it ends. It is wholly appropriate where a young person has been involved in a sufficiently minor offence, and sometimes in more serious offences. However, there is a serious problem where people put on this programme go on to offend further and there is no assessment of their risk to others.

I want to work this out with the Commissioner. I understand that when an incident occurs and it is investigated, a file is prepared and a potential culprit identified. Where does that file go? What is the pathway of the process? I would like some detail on this.