Ms Fiona Murphy:

I can deal with that. In trials, accused persons can certainly rely on their right to silence and not give evidence in a case. When an accused person is interviewed by members of An Garda Síochána in line with the proper procedures, he or she can put forward his or her case to those gardaí and obviously defence counsel is obliged to put that case to the victim in court. I appreciate what the Senator said that in some ways, that could be getting in by the back door previous sexual history matters that might not be relevant.

I wish to make it clear that those interviews can be excised and part of them can be removed for the purpose of going to the jury if there are aspects of it that are totally irrelevant and that should not play any part in the trial. That would be contingent on the ruling of the trial judge on the application for questions to be asked on the previous sexual history of the complainant or victim. An accused person's simply making reference to something in his or her interview with the Garda will not be enough to make it relevant for the purposes of the trial. If necessary, trial judges can order that those parts of the interview are irrelevant and should be excised. However, it is not always the case and I could not give statistics on it. Anecdotally, it seems to be the case that in the past five years at least, accused persons are more likely to give evidence at trial.

Senator McDowell mentioned the possibility of there being some provision whereby it is not acceptable for an accused person to give an account to the Garda and sit back in court and say nothing. I think that could have ramifications elsewhere to preclude somebody giving his or her own account to the Garda when he or she is interviewed in respect of a sexual offence but not in respect of other offences. I think there could be difficulties in that regard. I think that answers the questions that the Senator wanted the Bar to answer.