Lynn Ruane (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have a few questions and some of them are to seek clarity on a couple of things. Perhaps Mr. Donagh, Ms Phelan or Mr. Lalor will be able to answer my question on heads 18 and 19 and the existence of exceptional circumstances. The exceptional circumstances permit the court to allow second counsel. Is that saying that only at the say of the judge will that person have a second counsel, thus creating scenarios where some people will have two counsel and others will have one? I think someone said it erodes the right to two counsel, particularly in regard to serious offences. What is the benefit and what is the right regarding two counsel versus one? Does it create an unfair justice system whereby if people are not relying on legal aid, they may be able to have two counsel, but where people are relying on it, they may end up with only one counsel?

On the proceeds of crime stuff, am I reading it correctly that the proceeds of crime may be considered in an application if there has been, say, money laundering or whatever the charge may be where it is considered there may be proceeds of crime? If a family member has been assessed through the Criminal Assets Bureau, CAB, or something as having received the proceeds of crime, do they have the ability to apply for legal aid if they are going to challenge the assertion they received the proceeds of crime in a particular way? I am just not really understanding some of the heads in that section in terms of what they are actually saying.

Regarding the definitions of domestic violence, and Mr. Guerin hit on some of the definition stuff, is a general definition needed or is it about referring back to the existing Acts on domestic violence and subsequent Acts and legislation, even with respect to the sharing of online images and so on? Is it more that we should be referring to particular Acts that have already outlined what constitutes a criminal case rather than the list or even any sort of general definition?

Perhaps this is more for the Department, but I am trying to read heads 33, 34 and 35 in relation to the sharing of data between the Legal Aid Board and the courts. In head 35, it is stated that with the consent of the Minister, the board may prescribe suitable, specific measures in terms of the data, which kind of moves it away from the data protection regulation at an earlier point. However, it also states it would protect receiving information on someone’s health. What constitutes what information the Legal Aid Board might need to consider an application about a case at hand? It feels like it is suggesting more of a wide, sweeping sharing of information between the courts and the Legal Aid Board, where you may then be assessing someone not on the particular case but because all of a sudden you have all this other information on them. The health part stood out to me. Does somebody look at that and say this person has a background and has had a serious psychiatric illness so maybe we should not do something? How do we begin to use that information? Perhaps the questions on the intention of that data are more questions for the Department.

I have one question on human rights violations and legal aid that perhaps Ms Phelan can answer. I know this relates to criminal law, but when somebody wants to challenge where there have been human rights abuses, perhaps institutionally, in the prisons, in care homes or wherever it may be, that has to reach a certain threshold where it would be criminal. If someone wants to take a human rights challenge, is that something that can be considered under criminal law? Is it defined in that way that people could take a human rights challenge and apply for legal aid to do so if the threshold to constitute criminality were met?

Those are my questions for now.