Ms Kate Mulkerrins:

I am afraid I am one of those people who would need a little bit of time to distil that thought. The reason we think the public order model has worked and why it is suitable in this regard is that we have a tried and tested model. The difficulty with a new model as we see it are the types of conduct, of which the Deputy gave a really good overview, which include behaviours that in many circumstances, although not these particular ones, would not be viewed as intimidatory.

I completely accept that rows of people praying in front of a woman may impede her in her journey towards safe, legal access. That a person has a constitutional entitlement not to be intimidated would not necessarily fall under that public order Act. The nature of the behaviour would change the definition of what public order is, which is what this Act is doing in a particular zone that will be defensible, whereas making that general rule would in my view be too enlarged. Well, it may or may not. In the whole State, it would be difficult to suggest that people praying in proximity to someone outside a particular zone could be viewed as intimidatory. It might not be viewed as such by particular people.

Superintendent McNamara may wish to come in as he has actual policing experience. I am not a member of the police service. I am Garda staff employed for legal advice. This is about trying to bring the best operational experience together to inform this committee. The Deputy is absolutely right. This is an unusual juxtaposition for the Garda to find itself in, apart from the Health Act 1947, which no criminal lawyer ever thought he or she would know pre-Covid. Dr. McNamara may wish to expand on this from a policing perspective.