Mae Sexton (Longford-Roscommon, Progressive Democrats)

The judgments of the Court of Criminal Appeal which prompted such an outrageous judgment from Mr. Justice Carney are equally contemptible. Does this court feel itself to be superior to the Supreme Court? Did Mr. Justice Carney feel the same? Does society rely on such whimsical judgments being passed by judges who perceive a past slight on them from a higher court? The Judiciary, as much as the Cabinet and the Legislature, is there to protect the right of the citizen. This was in the minds neither of the judge when he gave his judgment nor of the Court of Criminal Appeal in the NY case. These judgments show that the discretion granted to the Judiciary should come under serious scrutiny.

I have brought my concerns and those of what I believe to be the majority of fair-minded and law abiding citizens to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and have argued that the existing guidelines that were clear in the Supreme Court decision are not being followed which is leading to the erosion of confidence in the entire criminal justice system. I have suggested that these Houses should make the sentences mandatory. In principle the Tánaiste agrees with some of what I say, and should the situation continue mandatory sentencing may be a possibility.

The Tánaiste should introduce mandatory minimal custodial sentencing for the crime of rape now. If with his legal expertise, he feels this is not appropriate now I call on him to consider the introduction of at least mandatory statutory sentencing guidelines to which judges must refer when delivering their judgments. I also call on him to introduce an ombudsman's office for the Judiciary which, among other things would ensure compliance with the guidelines and that personal precedent, which appears to be taking hold on the Bench and hardly serves the cause of justice will not continue to be followed. The precedents I have cited are those which should be acted on.

In sentencing a 26 year old man for robbery in Monaghan Judge Sean McBride said that if he had a licensed gun he would blow the head off anyone who came into his house. He subsequently issued a qualified apology for his words but not for his intent and his revulsion at the violation of the safety of people's homes and the security of their private place. What would he or any learned judge have said if some person entered his house and raped his wife or daughter? Would he subsequently apologise for his reaction to such an event? I ask the male Members of this august assembly how they would feel if Mary Shannon was their wife, sister, mother or daughter. Would they accept a non-custodial sentence as sufficient in this abominable set of circumstances?

On 20 March the Circuit Criminal Court in Galway gave a member of the local authority a deserved 12 month sentence for a fraud of €7,000 and an attempted fraud of a further €7,500. To compare low level fraud to a brutal rape is like comparing the McGillicuddy Reeks to the Alps, yet this crime merited incarceration while Mary Shannon's rapist walked free. That local authority member has a personal right to appeal. Mary Shannon has no personal right of appeal. It lies with a third party, the DPP, to exercise this right on her behalf if he so chooses. I call on him to do so because I have no doubt that the delay is causing extreme distress. I ask him also to introduce legislation to allow the victim in such a circumstance to instruct the DPP to appeal on her behalf as he would in a civil action with her own legal counsel.

I wish to ensure that never again in this State can a convicted rapist walk from a court with a suspended sentence. I repeat Goldsmith's prophetic words: "Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey, where wealth accumulates and men decay". I hope this is not the land to which we aspire.

See this speech in context