Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Apologies have been received from Deputies Butterly and Callaghan and Senator Ruane. I remind members to turn off their mobile phones or switch them to flight mode.

The purpose of our meeting today is to engage in detailed scrutiny of the Victims of Sexual Violence Civil Protection Orders Bill 2025 and assess the Bill from a policy, legal and financial perspective with a view to the committee recommending whether it should proceed to Committee Stage. As part of this process, it is intended to have an engagement on the Bill, which is sponsored by Deputy Matt Carthy, with a number of stakeholders. On behalf of the committee, I welcome Dr. Clíona Saidléar, executive director, and Ms Donna von Allemann, legal director, Rape Crisis Ireland; Ms Sarah Benson, CEO, Women's Aid; Ms Leona O’Callaghan, Ms Paula Doyle, Ms Shaneda Daly and Ms Sonya Stokes.

I will invite each organisation or individual to make an opening statement to a maximum of three minutes and then call the members of the committee, in the order in which they have indicated to me, to put their questions. In order to manage the committee's time effectively, I propose that each member commence with an initial five minutes to engage with our witnesses. It is important to note that the five minutes is for both questions and answers and therefore it is essential for members to put their questions succinctly and for witnesses to be succinct in their responses. When all members who have indicated have had their initial engagement, and time permitting, a second round will commence and each member will have up to three minutes for both questions and answers. As the duration of this meeting is limited, the times must be strictly adhered to. I ask everyone to be focused in their contributions.

Before I invite the witnesses to deliver their opening statements, I will explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practices of the Houses as regards references a witness may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected, pursuant to both the Constitution and statute, by absolute privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

I call on each of the organisations present to deliver their opening remarks, starting with Ms von Allemann.

Ms Donna von Allemann:

I thank the Chair and members for the opportunity to address the committee today.

Rape Crisis Ireland strongly supports the intent of this Bill. Victims supported by our member Rape Crisis Centres and those advocates the committee will hear from today have consistently reported fear of contact with their perpetrator following sentencing and release. That fear directly affects their mental health, their ability to engage with work and education and their families. Critically, it has an impact on other survivors' willingness to report.

The absence of a dedicated civil protection mechanism for survivors of sexual violence has been a gap in Irish law that victims and support services have identified for years. For this reason, we have supported this Bill and commend the survivors here today on their tireless advocacy on this issue. However, what we would like to see is some strengthening of the Bill's provisions. Our submission sets out 12 specific areas where we suggest that is necessary. I will not address them all but I will highlight some of the crucial ones.

The first is on the issue of presumption. The Bill currently gives the court a discretion to make an order. It states the court may do so. Without a presumption that an order will be made on conviction, judicial inconsistency may mean that many victims leave sentencing without any protection at all and with no opportunity to influence that outcome. We recommend a rebuttable presumption in favour of making an order.

The second is connected persons and geographical location. The Bill protects only the named complainant. It does not extend to family members, children and others close to the complainant, people who are routinely targeted as a means of indirectly harassing or attacking a victim. In the same way, the Bill limits protection to the complainant's place of residence, education or employment. This is too narrow. We recommend the Bill be extended to cover connected persons and geographical locations designated by the complainant.

The third is emergency orders. The Bill contains no mechanism for emergency protection. The Domestic Violence Act 2018 provides for emergency barring orders, granted urgently at out-of-hours court sittings. No equivalent exists here. That gap is most dangerous in the period immediately after release from custody.

This ties in with the fourth point I will highlight, namely, victim input. The Bill contains no mechanism for the complainant to have any say in the terms of the order at the time of sentencing or the changes that may need to be made after release. A survivor may have very specific needs. Their experiences of the perpetrator are profoundly valuable in assessing risk. We recommend an explicit right for the survivor to be entitled to file written submissions on the terms of the order before it is made and, as stated, the ability to have the order amended when necessary.

I thank the committee again for the opportunity to address it and urge it to recommend that the Bill proceed with the amendments our submission sets out.

Ms Sarah Benson:

Many thanks to the committee for this opportunity to contribute to its debate on the Victims of Sexual Violence Civil Protection Orders Bill 2025, which seeks to address a gap in the long-term protection and recovery for survivors of sexual violence.

When a perpetrator of sexual violence is released after serving a sentence, survivors may fear retaliation, being approached or harassed online and offline, and encountering them in daily life, particularly when they share the same community. This fear profoundly affects survivors' healing and recovery.

Existing remedies provide partial solutions to this issue, but they all present severe limitations, particularly in requiring separate civil proceedings, which can be re-traumatising, and requiring fresh evidence of harassment or intimidation based on behaviour that occurred after the conviction for the sexual offence, so in practice after release from custody. This misses the point that some survivors can be traumatised simply by the perpetrator approaching them. Importantly, this means that protection may be granted only after some further act of intimidation or harassment has happened, which means the physical and psychological safety of the survivor and their recovery has already been jeopardised.

The existing remedies have a maximum duration of 12 months or five years, depending on whether it is an order under the harassment and harmful communications Act or the Domestic Violence Act. This may not be long enough.

This Bill offers protection and peace of mind to survivors by providing that when someone is convicted for a crime of severe sexual violence, the judge, at sentencing, can impose an order restraining the person convicted of the offence from communicating with or approaching the victim, without the victim having to engage in any additional processes. This proposed legislation will work better than existing remedies because there is no need to subject victims or survivors to further court proceedings; the State rightly takes responsibility for the ongoing psychological and physical safety of survivors, rather than putting the onus on them to act for their safety or curtail their lives in order to avoid the perpetrator; the order can be made in advance to mitigate the risk of further harassment or intimidating behaviour on the part of the perpetrator prior to or after their release; the proposed Bill does not specify a maximum duration but leaves it to the discretion of the court; the orders are made at sentencing, preventing additional anxiety and stress around the time the perpetrator is released; and it is a survivor-centred measure that prioritises the victim's safety and well-being and gives them a better chance for healing and recovery without ongoing fear.

Women's Aid therefore supports this Bill but recommends that its scope be expanded to cover other indictable offences where victims have experienced severe domestic abuse. In our experience, when an abuser is released from custody, women frequently remain in fear of retribution, yet the absence of recent abuse bars them from obtaining a safety order, even where that absence is solely a consequence of the abuser's imprisonment. In practice, the victim must wait for "something to happen" before making a fresh application. For this reason, we suggest including in the Bill a provision with a requirement for courts to consider a long-term safety order for victims of domestic abuse when a current or former partner is convicted and sentenced to custody, not just for sexual violence crimes but for any indictable offences.

In our submission we also make further detailed suggestions to improve the Bill on Committee Stage, such as the inclusion of online sexual violence offences under the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020 and of intimate relationship as an aggravating factor. We remain available to discuss these suggestions in more detail.

Ms Leona O'Callaghan:

I am a survivor of childhood sexual violence. My abuser received a 17-year sentence for crimes against me. He had two similar convictions in relation to two other children before me.

This Bill is centred on safety. We cannot talk about safety without talking about the brutality of fear. The memory of his eyes staring at me as he raped me in a dark graveyard freezes my nervous system in a way I hope no one here ever experiences and that no child is built to cope with. Only by understanding that level of fear can you fully understand my need to feel safe from him now.

Beyond the abuse, I had to survive a criminal justice process that requires victims to relive it all. Moments I had spent years trying to forget I had to repeatedly relive.

I was an extremely unwell mum for those years, with suicide attempts and hospitalisations when it all proved too much. The hardest part for me was the night before his sentencing. I had to look my ten-year-old son in the eye and burden his little shoulders and world with the darkness of the rape of his mother before he read about it in the papers. That was the biggest cost of my decision to prosecute. I share this to give the committee a small insight into the price survivors in Ireland already pay. I ask members to recognise that we have done enough by the end of a trial. Please, let that be enough.

Without a protection order, I dread the day that man is released. His eyes alone can bring me to my knees. Even in high-security settings, he could not be controlled, committing further violent crimes in prison, yet I, the woman responsible for taking 17 years of his freedom, am meant to feel safe from revenge when he is released soon. I accept even with this Bill, it is too late for me. In a couple of years, this dangerous, violent rapist who I punished gets to share the same streets as me and even stand right behind me in a queue in my local shop. I am likely to return to wondering at times if I really see him in front of me or if it is my mind playing tricks on me out of fear. His evil eyes will soon meet my petrified eyes yet again and there is nothing I can do about it. We survivors come forward to get monsters like him off the streets and to protect other innocent children. They are your children, nieces and grandchildren. We do not ask for thanks; we ask to feel safe after we put ourselves front row in their firing line by coming forward.

I want to look survivors in the eye and tell them this process is hard but that it is safe, and this Bill brings me a step closer to that. I ask the committee to let me be the last person who feels they have to jeopardise their safety to bring a predator to justice. Little, scared Leona in that graveyard is watching now and begging for safety against him that she did not get as a child.

Current legislation simply is not enough. The onus should not be on me to return to court and be re-traumatised to apply for protection. It must be proactive, not reactive. I have done enough. The onus should be on the justice system to protect me now, and on the members of the committee that oversees it. Their job is to make the justice system fair, safe, and right. I have done my job, and it was a hard one. Today, I ask members to do theirs and pass this Bill in its entirety.

Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ms O'Callaghan’s contribution was very moving. I call Ms Doyle.

Ms Paula Doyle:

I thank the Chair and committee for having me. I am here as a survivor of stalking and rape. I appreciate the opportunity to speak but I need to be clear: the system failed me. Since 2016, for almost ten years, I have been living with fear. That fear began with stalking and messages that escalated over time, which became more intrusive and threatening. I went to An Garda Síochána looking for help, but at that time there were no stalking laws and I was told there was nothing that could be done. The stalking did not stop; it escalated. It ended in rape. During the investigation, it emerged that the man who had been stalking me was the same man who attacked and raped me. That matters because it shows that these are not isolated crimes. They are patterns of behaviour that escalate when there is no intervention. I live with the reality that this may have been prevented if this law had existed when I first asked for protection. I cannot say with certainty what would have happened if those protections had existed earlier but I believe there would have been intervention, accountability and a pathway to safety that simply did not exist when I first sought help.

Too often in Ireland our laws and protections arrive only after harm has been done. Survivors are left waiting while the system catches up. I am living proof that delays in recognising coercive, stalking, and escalating behaviour can have devastating consequences. We need a justice system that is genuinely victim-centred, responds earlier, acts faster and prioritises protection before violence escalates, not after.

I recognise that progress is being made but those protections have come far too late for me and others. The Bill proposes protection at sentencing, but only for new cases. My case is not new. My offender, like others, will be released. When he is, I will still be living in fear, not just for myself but for my children, who have already grown up in the shadow of this case.

The system places the burden back on the victim to seek further legal protection, re-engage, and fight again for safety from a man already found guilty. That is not justice. If this legislation is truly about protecting victims, it must include those of us who were failed before these laws existed. Protection should not depend on when one’s case happened; it should be automatic and enforceable for victims whose offenders are approaching release now because the risk does not end at sentencing.

I truly hope our elected TDs, in both government and opposition, have as much courage as so many victims have, and use their position and voice to bring about change. I ask the committee to ensure no victim is left behind because right now, I am.

Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Doyle for another moving contribution. I call Ms Daly.

Ms Shaneda Daly:

I am a survivor of sexual abuse by my father. Not only did my father sexually abuse me, he mentally, physical and emotionally traumatised me throughout my childhood. I run an online support group with almost 3,000 members and have spoken out to help others for the past 14 years. When sentencing my father to 15 years, the judge also stated he was never to contact me again. Unfortunately, I was to find out that there was no law to enforce this.

My father is not only a predator; he is arrogant and he thinks he is above any law and has no problem approaching me. The thought of this makes me feel terrified and that is why I do not go outside of my home much. I like to stay at home and know I am safe. The anxiety and stress I go through when having to attend things is so severe that I have missed important things such as family events, including my sister’s wedding.

The Bill would help victims to heal quicker and let them know they can legally prevent any contact from their abuser, let them know they are safer and let them know that their abuser cannot buy the house next door to them, which is actually happening to a close friend of mine. I do not want to go back to court and get any kind of order of protection as I feel it would add more trauma to my already traumatised life.

This Bill would be life-changing for future victims. I would love to tell people who contact me they are protected from the moment of sentencing and never have to go back to court in relation to their abuser.

Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Daly very much for her contribution. I call Ms Stokes.

Ms Sonya Stokes:

I am a survivor of sexual violence and this submission is based entirely on my own lived experience and the reality I continue to face every single day. My offender has been deceased since 5 December 2025. I only found out on 30 April 2026. I feel very let down by the State and I am willing to answer questions on that matter.

Victims will always be victims. The impact did not end when the abuse stopped, it did not end when the court case finished or it did not end when the system said it was over. For me, it never ended. I lived daily with fear, trauma, and anxiety. The fear of bumping into my abuser was constant. It was something I carried everywhere I went. I am always aware, alert, and carrying what was done to me.

There is no real freedom after abuse, not when the person who harmed you can walk freely in the same communities, streets, and spaces. While perpetrators move on with their lives, survivors do not get that same chance. We carry it for life. There are moments when fear takes over, my heart races, I feel panic, and I am brought straight back to the trauma. The trauma continues long after court ends. One of the hardest parts was knowing that at any moment, I could come face to face with the person who caused me so much harm. The fear was constant. It brought on anxiety, panic, emotional distress, and ongoing re-traumatisation. There is no real protection for survivors once perpetrators are released or living freely. That leaves people like me living in fear, avoiding places, changing how we live our lives and carrying the responsibility of our own safety. That should not be the case. This Bill is not just a piece of legislation to me; it is safety. It is the difference between living in constant fear and having some level of protection. It means not having to constantly look over my shoulder, live in fear of unexpected encounters and feel completely unprotected after the court.

For survivors like me, this Bill brings real change because right now the system may punish but it does not protect.

From my experience, there needs to be real, ongoing protection after court; clear boundaries to keep survivors safe; recognition that trauma does not end with a verdict; and a system that prioritises survivor safety long-term. This legislation is not just about policy. It is about real people and real lives. Our fight, pain and fear does not end but this Bill has the potential to make a real difference, to provide protection and safety, and to show that survivors are finally being heard.

Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all of the witnesses for their very brave contributions. I invite Deputy Carthy. Does he want to ask any questions as to fact?

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will make a few remarks, if that is in order. I thank the Deputy for assuming the Chair for this meeting. I also thank members of the committee for facilitating this detailed scrutiny of the Victims of Sexual Violence Civil Protection Orders Bill.

Members will have heard, and now understand, this is a relatively simple piece of legislation. It arose from an interaction I had last year, at the request by Senator Maria McCormack, to meet three women who we heard from - Ms O'Callaghan, Ms Daly and Ms Stokes. I subsequently met Ms Doyle, whom members have also heard from. Had the facilities been available today for us, several other victims and survivors, predominantly but not exclusively women, from all over this State would have welcomed the opportunity to speak in support of this legislation. None of them should ever have to do that. All of the people we have heard from, with their testimonies, are people who have been through huge trauma and experiences that most of us, thankfully, would never have to even imagine. They had the bravery to bring their stories to the authorities and are in a small minority of victims who have secured a sentence and conviction on the part of their attacker or abuser. What they have said to us is they have done our society and communities a great service by ensuring that justice has prevailed and a conviction was put in place.

This Bill will mean that at the same time an abuser is convicted, a court may also impose an order restraining the abuser, subsequent to release, from approaching the victim. I do not think that is too much to ask. Members will have heard, through the testimonies so eloquently outlined today, the importance and difference that would make to the lives of victims. It is a small piece of assurance that they seek and one that we, as legislators, have an obligation to provide.

I thank Rape Crisis Ireland and Women's Aid for their support and constructive suggestions in respect of this Bill. Only a very small percentage of those who experience sexual violence get justice and that must change. For the small percentage who manage to bring their case to court, it is often a very difficult and re-traumatising experience. We know, and this committee will have heard testimonies previously, about court cases taking too long and how the experience of victims and survivors is often negative in terms of their interactions with the justice system. Many have told us here at this committee that they have been made to feel as if they were on trial. All of that needs to be addressed.

When there is a conviction, we need to understand that is not the end of the journey for victims and survivors. In many cases, it is the end of the news stories and the public focus but, in many respects, the process of rebuilding lives only starts at that point. Members will have heard Ms Stokes, Ms O'Callaghan, Ms Daly and Ms Doyle talk about the anxiety, stress and fear that follows a conviction. Almost immediately, as soon as a conviction is secured and a custodial sentence imposed, a clock starts ticking in the minds of many victims and survivors as to what happens when a release data approaches and what protections are in place for them. At the moment, legally, there is virtually no protection. The only provision is that if, on release, an abuser makes an attempt to contact, harass or approach a victim or survivor, they have an obligation to return to the courts to seek an order restraining the abuser from doing so. We should all agree that is not good enough.

This committee has received submissions from many organisations that suggest ways to improve the Bill. We have also received constructive analysis from the Oireachtas legal services that we, as a committee, should take into account on Committee Stage. My appeal to members of this committee is that we proceed as quickly as possible to move this legislation to Committee Stage and commit, as legislators, on a cross-party basis to make this Bill law by the end of this year.

Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I invite members in the order they have indicated to engage with witnesses.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank everyone for their contributions. In particular, I thank the ladies for their personal contributions. As I always say, I recognise that witnesses are re-traumatised by coming here before us again and appearing on camera. I have no doubt about the anxiety of coming here before us to tell their story, but if it can bring about that change Deputy Carthy spoke about, I applaud the witnesses and thank them for that. All of us here must work to ensure that we effect change and work with organisations to see where we can enhance the Bill. At the same time, there is an onus on us, across all parties and none, to prevent what the witnesses spoke about.

I made notes as the witnesses were speaking. Ms Doyle said that the risk does not end on sentencing and Ms Stokes said that fear is constant. I also noted Deputy Carthy said that a conviction is not the end of a story. That is the reality of what we are talking about here today. While Ms Stokes told her story, I whispered to Senator McCormack whether I had missed something. What happened that she was not notified, if she does not mind me asking? There was a gap there.

Ms Sonya Stokes:

A huge gap.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. That is an important part of transparency because Ms Stokes lives with the fear of the abuser knowing her whereabouts all the time.

Ms Sonya Stokes:

Yes.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What happened then?

Ms Sonya Stokes:

Does the Senator really want to know?

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is important that we do, if Ms Stokes feels comfortable.

Ms Sonya Stokes:

I am very comfortable. I am very angry at the system. I feel so let down by the State. It is one thing for me, as a victim, not to know but for the lady working in the Probation Service did not know that an offender was out, who had 18 months post-supervision and should have been supervised. That person was in a nursing home - for obvious reasons I will not name the nursing home - looking after elderly people. A high-risk sex offender was placed in a nursing home. Personally speaking, if my mom was alive, I would not like my mom in a nursing home alongside a predator. I have done a few bits in the background that I will not discuss today, but I want answers. I want to know why this man was allowed in. Why was I not notified about this man?

On 24 December, I had a very bad seizure and ended up in hospital. It is why my nose looks like this today. My seizure was due to stress caused by the fear that any other little child would be hurt from this man's hand. I was not the only victim. Between Ireland and the UK, he was known as a high-risk sex offender for nearly 50 years. My understanding is that I could have been notified he was in post-supervision. If he was out of post-supervision, I would have understood but the fact that he was in post-supervision, it was my understanding that out of common courtesy I would have been told.

I have spoken to a member of An Garda Síochána who was with me on the day of my case. Again, I will not go back to that because it is very re-traumatising for me. She was very supportive to me along the way but, unfortunately, she was off duty at this time.

She said she would have told me as a common courtesy. I do not know if there was there a boo-boo in the system at the time but I want answers. It is totally wrong that a high sex offender can be placed in a nursing home alongside elderly women, and I suppose that raises a big question mark over that.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is another conversation we could have on safeguarding and everything else.

Ms Sonya Stokes:

It is indeed.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a whole conversation on safeguarding. Ms Saidléar and I have had many of them down through the years, but the witness is bringing it into the justice committee today.

Ms Sonya Stokes:

I am sorry for interrupting the Senator, but I have written to the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and I am sure he will get back to me in his own time on that matter.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely. If it is okay, I have a question for either Ms von Allemann or Ms Benson. They are used to reading legislation and are great at contributing to how we can strengthen the Bill. I heard Ms Benson address it and Ms von Allemann also had four points on it.

If they were to provide a synopsis of it to the committee, what are the main points we need to pull forward and ensure are included within this? If the Minister were watching today, what would they be saying? Either or both witnesses might answer that.

Ms Donna von Allemann:

I will give us both a chance to say something.

The main point is definitely the victim input and giving them an opportunity to maybe give a written submission to explain what it is they need. It is all very well having an order put in place that a judge has put together, but that may not necessarily be what the victim needs and it may not be expansive enough or provide for specific scenarios or details, such as geographical location or if there are children or dependants in the house. Making sure we are getting that victim input into what that order must look like is one of the most important things.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms von Allemann for that.

Ms Sarah Benson:

In our submission, we highlighted that it is restricted to one particular offence. When we hear from all these incredible women who are sharing their stories today, there are multiple different offences happening and one that stands out very much to me is stalking. One of our recommendations is that the provisions of offences under the harassment and harmful communications Act should be included. That includes stalking, harassment and image-based sexual abuse.

People also think for victims and survivors of domestic violence that there is no crime of domestic violence but many crimes are prosecuted where the perpetrator has been a current or former partner. Those are very strong ties that bind. There are family connections and children in common. When those individuals are incarcerated, it is not at all a given that a safety order will be granted. This legislation could be expanded to include provision for where there are serious and indictable offences that are going to involve a sentence, that the Judiciary would presume to consider protection for the duration of the sentence and after.

I also highlight that we have significant experience in some cases, and some of the women contributing here today may have also experienced this, where sometimes the harassment continues from prison. Orders should be able to be invoked there to make sure nobody is making phone calls or using online capabilities to continue to stalk and monitor. Expanding protection a little further than the provisions currently in the legislation would be very welcome.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witness and welcome her comments.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I commend Deputy Carthy and Senator McCormack on all the work they have done, as well as the team that works behind them because they do not always get the platitudes and thanks they rightly deserve. I thank the Rape Crisis Centre and the other groups that came in to speak today. I also want to thank Ms Doyle, Ms Daly, Ms Stokes and Ms O'Callaghan for their testimony, and for those who have engaged with me in the past six months or so on this to give me an understanding of exactly what they and their families have had to go through. I am also blown away by how unselfish they are when they talk about victims and survivors in the future. They are trying to protect them and that is the basis they are coming from. That is very welcome and is a great trait.

I just want to ask Ms Doyle a question. She spoke about if this legislation is to truly protect victims, it must include those of us who were failed before this law existed. Am I right that she witness believes this law should apply to those who are currently convicted of sexual violence, and if so, how does she think that would work?

Ms Paula Doyle:

I thank the Deputy for his question. As I said, if laws had been in beforehand, I wholeheartedly believe my rape would not have happened because at the time, the alleged perpetrator would have been picked up. So far, my experience of the judicial system, which I have spoken about, has been so convoluted and broken. With all due respect, I am not qualified in law. I do not know how it would be done. I am just going to use my rapist and stalker as an example. On the week before he is due for release, which is in three years and five months on 18 October 2028, why could he not be brought to court where I would be given a protection order? I would have absolutely no problem doing that for the protection of myself and my children before his release to get a protection order. I do not see why that cannot happen. I do not understand because I am not qualified in law. I do not understand why I cannot be given a protection order.

I worry about when he comes out. It has been ten years since he has been involved in my life. Unbeknown to me, three and a half years before the rape, in the text message before the rape he said he was going to get me. He got me. Why have I not got protection? Why have these women sitting beside me not got protection? I am so happy that victims coming after us, please God, will be protected, but something needs to be done for those who are already hurt and have done so much.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Doyle for that. I will probably ask the same question to the Rape Crisis Centre and Women's Aid. Would this work retrospectively? Could they see anything getting in the way of this, or do they think this could work right now?

Ms Donna von Allemann:

I do not see why it could not work. It is something that would require engagement with the Probation Service and the Courts Service on the logistical aspects of it, but I do not see why, from a legal perspective, this could not be done.

Ms Sarah Benson:

Certainly, there could be a mechanism if somebody is already incarcerated. I am not a lawyer but I would like to think the crime is not in question. Somebody has been convicted, so it is not a matter of changing the nature of the conviction. It is an additional layer of civil protection, as I understand it. I would like to think that should be considered.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Am I right that the last thing we want is for victims and survivors to also have to go back to court to apply for a pardon or safety order at that stage?

Ms Sarah Benson:

The difficulty is when that happens - and it does happen because people are terrified, primarily women - they are faced with the statement from the judge or the determination that nothing has happened. Often, it has not happened because the person is in jail but there is every possibility and there certainly is the fear that it could happen. That proactive approach would be better.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Was Ms Doyle looking to get back in there?

Ms Paula Doyle:

Yes, just for a second. For four and a half years before my case came to court, the alleged perpetrator at the time would drive up and down my road. I could not let my four-and-a-half-year-old girl out to play and pick daisies in the front garden. I was petrified for my own four children. I tried to apply for a protection order at the time but I could not because he was not related to me. There was nothing to stop him driving up and down my road. The garda said he did not stop outside my house, but it was harassment.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses.

Maria McCormack (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak on this Bill. As Deputy Carthy alluded to, maybe a year ago, we met with these fantastic ladies. They came to us and told us of the many different failures in the justice system for victims and survivors of sexual abuse, rape and everything that goes along with it. In fairness to Deputy Carthy, he listened, went away, looked into everything and has started on a journey with them to try to reform the justice system, one Bill at a time.

For anyone listening here today, these women's testimonies are powerful but there could be many more women in here testifying. To bring it back to Deputy Carthy's comments, it is about when the victim gets to the stage, as Ms O'Callaghan mentioned, of actually surviving the criminal justice system because it is such a journey to get through the justice system in Ireland at the minute with how long it takes and the number of failures. It is so difficult for a victim to go through that process. When they come out the other side, and if they are lucky enough to secure a conviction against their perpetrator, their healing should begin then. That is what they say in therapy; that your healing will begin then. I am speaking from what the witnesses have said to me. Unfortunately, the clock starts to tick and the countdown begins to when this perpetrator is going to get out and that is absolutely ludicrous. I cannot believe, in 2026, that we are actually sitting here and that women are asking, "Can we get a protection order from this person who has raped me?" This is as simple as it is. It is straightforward legislation that they are actually here begging for the State to say, "Okay. This man or woman has seriously harmed you. We are going to help to protect you." As Ms Stokes said in her opening remarks, this is not just another piece of legislation. This is safety.

I see it as this being common sense. I really hope this committee will work together, send back a report and let the legislation go through all the Stages of the Houses as quickly as possible. In fairness to Deputy Cathy and his office, they have worked tirelessly on this and have everything in place. We know what needs to happen. We need to move on to the next Bill now. There are many other pieces of legislation that need to be debated. This is only the start of it. I will ask the ladies to give me one line. What would this Bill mean to them, if it went through?

Ms Sonya Stokes:

Not only would it matter for me, it would end the suffering for all victims out there. No more suffering. Let them go to have their healing. Every survivor should have their healing. Personally speaking, if you will hear me out for one second, on behalf of myself for a moment, even though my predator is now deceased I will continue fighting for all of these women out there. Victims deserve and should have rights. No victim should ever have to suffer. I should not be sitting here today. I should be back home in Portlaoise with my daughter who is in hospital at the moment, but I feel very strongly about this and that victims deserve better.

Maria McCormack (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Well done.

Ms Shaneda Daly:

When I tell people what I am doing, or they ask about this, they ask, "Is that not already there?", "Is that not common sense?" and "It should be there."

Ms Paula Doyle:

Victims deserve protection. It is supposed to be a judicial system. We deserve justice and protection.

Ms Leona O'Callaghan:

It would probably mean two things to me. One is that my plan would be that I would have to leave Ireland when he gets out. I cannot look that man in the eyes. I cannot accept him going around the streets and face the revenge I have put myself in the front line for by coming forward. Without a protection order, I will leave. I would not be able to stay in my home and with my children. Having a protection order would make that difference to me personally.

The other difference it would make is it would make me feel as if the members have done their jobs today. I am not being funny but they oversee the justice system. I have done my job. It was really tough. It is time for the members to do theirs. They oversee the system. This should already be there. He has already raped me. He has already harmed me. I do not need to prove he is a threat to me. He has already done it many, many times. I ask members to protect me, now that I have actually faced him and caused a situation where he might likely look for revenge against someone who has taken away his freedom, especially seeing that he is a violent person who cannot be controlled in prison. How am I supposed to tell myself at night that I will be okay? I will not and neither will other women or children who are walking the streets. I have done enough, so give me the protection now.

Garret Kelleher (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Once again, I continue to be blown away by the courage and strength that the witnesses have all shown by coming into the Houses of the Oireachtas repeatedly. I heard Ms O'Callaghan speak eloquently at an audiovisual room presentation organised by my colleague, Senator McCormack. Her opening statement was powerful and there was an awful lot in it. At a very basic level, I look upon our role as legislators as ensuring the support of survivors of sexual crime is, at the very least, given equal priority in the criminal justice system as trying to punish offenders who have committed horrendous crimes. Bringing more compassion into the system and having a more victim-centred approach will not only be of some solace to victims of horrendous sexual crimes but will also give others who have had similar experiences more confidence, and possibly the courage, to come forward and report incidents they may be fearful will not see justice and that would put them in the firing line, as Ms Benson spoke about. I will come back to the issue of women being in fear of retribution post the criminal trial.

I have a question for Ms Doyle. Our job is to try to make progress and not to pat ourselves on the back for progress that is being made because it is an ongoing journey. We need to make things better from a legislative point of view to protect victims of crime. Ms Doyle mentioned in reference to her own case the fact there was no legislation around stalking and it was not recognised as an offence. Although she had reported it, the Garda was limited as to what it could do. Will she tell us a little more about the progress made since then, which was obviously of no help whatsoever to her, and how that has improved the situation for people who might be victims of stalking and harassment in reporting it, so that intervention can be made at an earlier stage?

Ms Paula Doyle:

Yes. I still do not think the stalking laws at the moment go far enough. They would not have completely helped in my case because I did not know the face of the stalker. I am limited in applying my case to the new stalking laws. We need to keep pushing all the time and push our boundaries even further than they are. We have survivors coming to us now who are so very scared. It was during the investigation that the Garda found out and it was five days after my rape. It was something as simple as the detective going into my phone and looking up the phone number in the Pulse system, which took two minutes. Why could that not have been done before? It was because there were no laws there. In 2019, and the three and a half years previous to that, I was being stalked. The laws only came in 2021 to 2022. They cannot help me now; I know that. I still think the stalking laws that are there are not quite up to scratch now but that is for another day.

Garret Kelleher (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Doyle. In the time I have left, I will turn to Ms Benson. Where does she see things falling short under the current system and how can that be made more robust in relation to protecting women? Obviously, there is the re-traumatisation during the trial we have heard spoken about, but also post conviction and post release. Will Ms Benson elaborate on that a bit in the time we have left?

Ms Sarah Benson:

I would like to pick up on what Ms Doyle was saying.

The stalking legislation brought in something we fought very hard for with colleagues around civil protection orders. However, it requires a complainant to have an address to be able to have a respondent, so if a person does not know who his or her stalker is, that leaves him or her at a disadvantage. Moreover, at the point of conviction there is not an automatic consideration of the protection in other jurisdictions, which might be a lifelong protective order for the victim or survivor. This legislation could fill that gap. It is very important.

As I say, under the Domestic Violence Act it is an aggravating offence if the perpetrator is a current or former partner, and this is now proved in case law for sentencing. There are reasons for that. There are higher risks of ongoing threats and abuse, particularly where there are children in common or where both individuals live in the same community. This legislation could also consider making it automatic. I have come across individual cases where judges have given safety orders - in one case, a lifelong safety order, which would reach beyond the provisions of the Act. However, that requires somebody to advocate. It requires a lawyer asking for it, whereas if this was built in, as Ms Stokes said, as a presumptive measure in some of the other serious offences associated with the kinds of harms we are talking about, it could be incredibly supportive to a wider range of victims and survivors.

Garret Kelleher (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Benson and apologise to the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach for going over my time. I was a bit long-winded with my question.

Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, there was a point to be finished. We will proceed to the second round. Only one person has indicated. Does anybody else wish to speak?

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My questions this time are for Deputy Carthy. We are getting into the balls of the law itself and the piece of legislation. For us to bring it through, having read it and everything else-----

Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is down for the second session.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay. I will get the Deputy next time.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a couple of comments before our guests leave. I mentioned the original meeting I held approximately a year ago, and it was very evident at that point that this was a group of people who had not come into the Oireachtas for sympathy or simply to have their story heard. There was a demand for meaningful action. I thank the Minister for allowing this legislation to go further than most Opposition Bills do. That decision was made by the Minister and Government largely at the behest of members of this committee from Government parties who had met with the same people I had. I thank them all for that, as well as members who could not be here.

It is imperative that we move to the next stage as quickly as possible. There are numerous proposals and suggestions in the written submissions that we have received, including from the organisations here today, as to how this Bill could be strengthened. On the other hand, we also have the legal opinion that has been given to us. The Irish Constitution is a great document but it sometimes presents challenges, particularly when we are trying to progress an Opposition Bill through the Houses of the Oireachtas. There are things I would like to see in this Bill that will prove very challenging. I would welcome further support from the Minister and his Department in navigating those challenges, not least in respect of how we deal with the retrospective application of this law, as Ms Stokes said, because it is not fair on people today who had the courage to report the crime that was committed against them and have gone through the ordeal of the judicial process. While there have been improvements in how victims and survivors are treated, in terms of both reporting and the judicial process, it is still a daunting and in many cases retraumatising experience. They have come through all of that and secured a conviction, and are living in fear many years after the rest of us have stopped thinking about their situation, because the perpetrator has been released and is at large in society. They cannot do anything until something happens to them, and that is where there is an anomaly. We will try to deal with that. I am open to dealing in as practical way as possible with any amendments that come through from members.

Going back to that initial meeting, I am very conscious that as soon as we pass this law there is going to be another that needs to be passed, and another piece of work, because we have to move to a victim-centred judicial system. We are coming at this from the exact opposite position. We are, in many respects, taking on a monumental piece of legal work. Much progress has been made by people before us in this House and outside of it, but we have an onus now, a responsibility, to take the next steps. Above all, the most important job of work that we have is to ensure those victims and survivors within our society who have yet to tell their story and report the crimes committed against them will feel comfortable and willing to do so. Ultimately, that will only happen when people can come into a committee like this and tell us the judicial system has actually served them well. We are a bit away from that just yet.

Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for that contribution and the witnesses for coming in today. In particular, I thank the non-professional people who gave personal testimonies. It has been very moving and powerful. Members will agree that we need to act on this, and to use Ms Stoke’s words, we need to push it all the way. I propose that we publish the opening statements on the committee's website. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I invite Deputy Carthy to make his presentation.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is very little to be added in terms of the point that we are at in the legislation. I reiterate my thanks that we have got this through Second Stage and are now at the point of detailed scrutiny. The committee will need to address a number of issues, some of which we heard about from victims and survivors who have given their testimonies here today. It is a travesty that we have people who have gone through what the women before us today have gone through and have come out the other side of a successful conviction but are raising a serious anomaly. Of course, defendants and people who have been convicted of crimes have constitutional rights but I do not accept that there should be a weighting in favour of those rights above the rights of those who have had the courage to tell their stories and to inform our justice system of a significant deficiency.

Again, I thank the committee secretariat for facilitating this hearing and I also thank the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach. As Members of the Oireachtas, we all know what we would be unable to do much were it not for the support of our staff. I want to put on the record my thanks to Caoilfhionn Ni Donnabháin who has done much of the research and preparatory work on this legislation. I am happy to take any questions Members may have.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy. I want to pick up on his closing remarks in the previous session when he spoke about the fact that sometimes we are constrained by the Constitution. One of the issues that arises is the restricting of a person's freedom of movement under Article 40.4.1° How do we overcome that issue? It is a fair question in all of this because it is part and parcel of it. How does the Deputy envisage that we would be able to address it?

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a couple of points to note. The Senator asks an important question. The provision in law that this legislation is bringing forward exists in our harassment legislation. Under section 28 of the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2023, there is already a provision for a protection order to be put in place at the point of conviction that can be applied subsequent to release. An issue has been raised through legal opinion in respect of making a civil protection order on conviction without allowing a court the discretion to consider certain factors to assess whether the making of the order is merited. That is easily addressed by way of an amendment on Committee Stage and I am happy to work with the legal services in the Oireachtas to find a formula of words that will address any concerns in that regard.

Anne Rabbitte (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That would be very welcome,. The fact that a precedent has been set in other legislation is good, as Ms Benson said earlier. There is nothing else. My main question related to a person's movement.

Tom Brabazon (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That concludes our engagement with Deputy Carthy. We will now go into private session.