Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I move amendment No. 62:

In page 30, between lines 2 and 3, to insert the following:

21.—In the case of an accused person tried on indictment for an offence carrying a maximum or mandatory sentence of life imprisonment, who has been acquitted, where at any time following such acquittal the Director of Public Prosecutions comes into possession of significant new evidence which demonstrates that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, he or she may apply to the Court of Criminal Appeal for an order setting aside the acquittal and directing a retrial."

There was some debate on this important matter on Committee Stage. The Minister alluded to ongoing research in the United Kingdom on it. The amendment relates to where new DNA evidence or other compelling evidence comes to light in a case. A correcting mechanism to deal with miscarriages of justice is already in place for those wrongly convicted. However, no such mechanism exists in cases where new compelling evidence comes to light after an individual is acquitted for a serious offence which carries a mandatory life sentence, such as murder and rape. The public would find such a prospect where nothing further could be done to be unacceptable.

Last night we spoke at some length on rebalancing aspects of the criminal justice process, about which the Minister became animated. This is another compelling case for rebalancing. We would all be aghast at a case where compelling evidence emerged that the conviction was unsafe. There must be an equal measure of concern where an individual walked free from a charge of an heinous crime but where new evidence would demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that he or she had committed it. People would find it unacceptable that the person would never again have to answer the charge. On Committee Stage, the Minister was well-minded to further consider this amendment. While the constrained timeframe may not have allowed him to consider all matters raised on Committee Stage, I hope he has given some thought to this amendment.

See this speech in context