Dáil debates

Tuesday, 27 June 2006

Criminal Law (Home Defence) Bill 2006: Second Stage.

 

8:00 pm

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

Actually, I have a few minutes remaining. My concern is that the emotive nature of an encounter with a trespasser or an intruder with what might be perceived by the occupier as a criminal intent would have the effect of rendering a person incapable of properly assessing the reasonableness of his or her response and a tragedy of serious proportions might then ensue. We must consider whether the law as it stands in the form of the 1997 and 1964 Acts is sufficient to protect the occupiers or whether change is required along the lines suggested by Deputy Jim O'Keeffe or those suggested by Senator Morrissey.

I have concerns about situations that may not be as clear as the types of scenarios I have outlined, namely, cases of persons visiting a premises where their status is unclear. Perhaps someone is an uninvited guest to a house during a social occasion, such as a gate-crasher at a party. Under the Deputy's Bill, that person is considered a trespasser, as he or she has unlawfully gained access to the premises. To allow other guests who have been invited to the party to do extreme violence to that person and to deny him or her any civil remedy, no matter what their age, is unconscionable. This Bill has not been well thought through in that regard.

The issues raised by the Deputy's Bill are worthy of further consideration. It must be remembered that provisions in this area contained in the 1997 Act were drafted as a result of the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission and generally have served us well. We must be careful in considering changes in this law, which is why I favour the reasonable approach taken by Senator Morrissey. I am very unhappy with some of the implications of the Fine Gael Bill, because I do not think they are reasonable. If Members bring forward Private Members' Bills in either House of this Parliament they should think through all the implications of what they suggest. This legislation provides that a child trespasser can be the victim of extreme violence but will have no right of redress whatsoever against a group of people who happen to be present in a house and gain the consent of the owner of the house. I do not think that is reasonable.

The Government's amendment proposes postponing the legislation for six months to allow it to be thought through. I assure Deputy Jim O'Keeffe that this is not evasion. The issue is important and there will be a criminal law (miscellaneous provisions) Bill in the autumn, as I have told him on a number of occasions. The Government will consider whether the issue should be addressed in that Bill. It will also consider whether the approach suggested by Senator Morrissey is the right one to pursue. It will consider fully the Fine Gael Bill presented today but, as I have already said, it will not be very attracted to the areas in which it departs from Senator Morrissey's, wherein it is careless and excessive. I promised in this House that I would carefully consider any proposals brought forward in this House.

Deputy Kenny asked whether I had personal experience of an incident of this kind. Yes, I did. When I was 19 years of age, a burglar broke into the upper floor of the house in which I lived with my parents.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.