Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy. I also thank the witnesses.

I will pick up Deputy Shortall's point about section 10 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act. The Deputy gave very good and recent examples of where section 10 does not seem to be considered by the Garda to be an adequate basis for action in situations where what clearly looks to be harassment of people, be they recent migrants or others, in places where they live is taking place. Section 10 is not being used in respect providers of abortion services. Therefore, it is not proving to be adequate at present. In that context, I wonder why would we then have confidence that it would suddenly be used differently. There are a few specific reasons in this context as to why section 10, in its current form, is not adequate. I am very concerned about the apparent proposal to lose the explicit provisions in the general scheme and revert to those in section 10. I am of the view that we should link with section 10. For example, section 10(1) refers to one person persistently harassing another. In such circumstances, it must be a case of one individual consistently harassing another. Subsection (2) contains very useful descriptions of what might constitute harassment, but the requirements under subsection (1) mean that you could have these relay situations where, once again, multiple people who work in a hospital may be harassed on their way in. The latter does not come under section 10 unless a person is being harassed repeatedly by one individual. There could be a relay of different protestors in an organised way, each taking turns to harass people on their way in. That would fall outside the ambit of section 10. The relay issue that was discussed is especially relevant in the context of warnings.

I may agree with the gardaí about the global warning issue but maybe not that of the relay warning. If the prohibited conduct is the issue then there should be some recording of a warning for prohibited conduct or, as Deputy Shortall said, there maybe some aspects of prohibited conduct which should just directly be an offence.

Returning to section 10, first, it is not working now and, second, it includes requirements which could act as loopholes in relation to the matter where the same individual must harass the same individual. I am really concerned about that. While it is good to be consistent with section 10(2) in describing the kinds of action that are harassment, simply relying on the existing law will probably be inadequate. Does the Department have thoughts on that?