Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 3, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following:

"(b) by the repeal of section 30 and the substitution of the following:

'30.—The inquest has a duty to establish the following:

(a) the identity of the deceased;

(b) when and where the death took place;

(c) the medical cause of death; and

(d) the surrounding circumstances of death;

in establishing this, the coroner is not permitted to allow any consideration of these matters which apportions civil or criminal liability.',".

This amendment addresses the other area which I suggested required amendment at this stage. Amendments Nos. 3 and 4 are based on the recommendations of the review of the coroner service. Amendment No. 3 is based on recommendation 49 of the working group which stated the jurisdiction of the coroner should include the investigation not only of the medical cause of death but also the circumstances surrounding it. This, it added, should be expressed in positive terms in the new Coroners Bill. This recommendation featured on the list of 110 recommendations produced by the working group.

The purpose of an inquest should not be confined to providing justice and answers for the family of the deceased, which are crucial functions in themselves. One of the purposes of the coroner is to try to prevent further fatalities where these may be preventable. In the tragic case of Frances Sheridan, to give one sad example, the Coroner's Court was not allowed to ask questions to which answers were necessary if the causes of her death were to be fully understood and to allow recommendations to be made aimed at preventing further fatalities. The court was not in a position to examine the understaffing, underfunding and mismanagement which tragically contributed to some preventable deaths. It is reasonable to seek a role for coroners in attempting to prevent tragic deaths.

The reason a coroner cannot expand his or her investigation is the narrow interpretation of the purpose of the coroner arising from the wording of section 30 of the current Act. This matter must be addressed by deleting the section and replacing it with the wording proposed in the amendment.

Inquests, by their nature, are investigations which are warranted in the public interest. If establishing the cause of death is limited to determining the medical cause of death, as is currently the case according to the review group, the ability of the court to make recommendations in the interests of public safety and the prevention of future fatalities is severely restricted and the role of the coroner is to do little more than to confirm the pathologist's post mortem report. A balance is required at this stage. The amendment would redress the current imbalance and mirrors the recommendation of the review group. I hope the proposers of the Bill and the Minister will accept it.

See this speech in context