Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

That is the point I am making. If I begin to go through the law on sexual assault, this Bill will become immensely long and complicated and I will start addressing problems which nobody thought about before we started this evening's discussion. I do not want to reopen the question of whether a genuinely held belief, even though unreasonable, is a defence because, according to my recollection of the Supreme Court decision in the CC case, as long as the belief was honestly held and even if it was an unreasonable opinion, it is a defence. Therefore, section 2(3) of the 2006 Act states:

It shall be a defence to proceedings for an offence under this section for the defendant to prove that he or she honestly believed that, at the time of the alleged commission of the offence, the child against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed had attained the age of 15 years.

Section 2(4) continues:

Where, in proceedings for an offence under this section, it falls to the court to consider whether the defendant honestly believed that, at the time of the alleged commission of the offence, the child against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed had attained the age of 15 years, the court shall have regard to the presence or absence of reasonable grounds for the defendant's so believing and all other relevant circumstances.

That does not mean an honest but unreasonable relief is not a defence. We are back to the old conundrum, so the decision we have made in respect of the Bill before us is to leave the issue of guilty knowledge on exactly the same basis as applies in the case of sexual assault and to push it no further.

See this speech in context