Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)

The Geoghegan family is dealing with the tragic loss of a partner and son. The House is united in its determination to deal with this matter and it joins in sympathy with the family. The House recognises the nature of the challenge put to the criminal justice system by certain elements in our society and we will continue to fight those people with the full rigours of the law to the greatest extent we possibly can in this democratic society. We are agreed on that and none of us is suggesting that one of us is more determined than the other on that point.

I refer to the questions raised by the Deputy. Section 72 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 provides, as he said, that a person who participates in, or contributes to, any activity of a criminal organisation is guilty of an offence attracting a maximum penalty of five years. We are satisfied, as is the Garda Commissioner, that he can operate those provisions, as enacted. A question has been raised by the Deputy and Deputies from the area regarding the possible parallel of using the same situation as applied under the Offences Against the State Act in respect of subversive offences in the Special Criminal Court. The courts have already held in case law in cases involving the Offences Against the State Act that the opinion of a chief superintendent is not conclusive and it is up to the court to decide how much weight should be given. In practice the Special Criminal Court has tended to disregard such evidence if the accused denies membership on oath. In other words, the basic point to be made is that, constitutionally, one can not escape the requirement, according to the courts, of corroborative evidence in addition to any belief that a Garda officer, however well respected and professional, may have in respect of his or her opinion of an accused's activities.

Legal advice is that in the case of a trial by jury, allowing evidence of opinion by a chief superintendent that a person is a member of a criminal organisation would amount to a statement without evidence that the accused is guilty would lead to evidence as to the bad character of the accused. This would be so prejudicial that it could not be countered by any direction by the judge to the jury and such a provision would in fact probably be unconstitutional as it would not allow a fair trial. These are the parameters in which we must operate.

We will do all we can to improve the efficacy of this legislation. We will do so working with the Garda Commissioner, at his request, on his advice and in respect of anything that we can do to assist beyond that point. It is important to make the point that we will do whatever is possible in that regard consistent with the Constitution.

On the question of covert surveillance, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform indicated that the heads of the Bill will be brought to Government next week. We will seek, arising out of the approval of the heads of the Bill and as a matter of priority, detailed provisions under the criminal justice legislation.

With regard to the DNA database, €80 million is being provided in next year's Estimates to provide for the forensic laboratory and improved DNA database that would ensue as a result. Legislation in that regard is being prepared as well.

The question of witnesses coming forward in terms of the witness protection programme is ongoing. There have been many advances made in this matter regarding inferences to be drawn on the right to silence. All of these provisions have been enacted in this House. We have also an Act, which has withstood court challenge, on the question of where people have given written statements and subsequently, for whatever reason one can surmise, were not prepared to proceed with giving verbal evidence in court. The ability of the judge to rely on the written statements to secure the conviction has been upheld.

These are important new provisions in criminal justice legislation, enacted in both the 2006 Act and 2007 Act, which have brought results which otherwise would not have perhaps secured convictions without that new legal basis for so doing.

I repeat that the Garda Commissioner has our full support in whatever matters, in terms of operational and legislative requirements, that he considers he may need. He made the point today that he has the armoury of that working and effective legislation behind him, even though that in no way detracts from the immediate requirement of identifying those who perpetrated this murder and bringing them to justice, and he will do so with the full rigours of the law.

See this speech in context