Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

I do not propose to accept the amendment. The amendment would provide that the Minister could go back to the High Court to seek a variation of a warrant for the arrest of the person only "prior to the execution of the warrant". That would limit the discretion of the Minister in a way that could be injurious to the interests of the sentenced person and to the interests of justice.

The Minister must be able to apply to the High Court at any time after the warrant is issued or executed if he becomes aware of new information that would justify him in going back to the court to seek a variation of the warrant. The amendment would limit the Minister's discretion in this regard.

The Bill, as presented, provides an opportunity for the Minister to bring any new information to the court's attention, regardless of when it arises. The amendment could remove that possibility and I do not think that is the intention behind the amendment. Perhaps the Deputy who moved the amendment was concerned that new information would become available that would alter the grounds for seeking the person's arrest. In such circumstances, the court will have its own inherent discretion about how to deal with such a situation, even where it has not been formally notified by the Minister of such developments.

In all the circumstances, I am satisfied the amendment is unnecessary, although I understand the thinking behind it.

See this speech in context