Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

Life sentence prisoners are reviewed by the Parole Board on a number of occasions before any substantial concessions are recommended. Furthermore, they continue to serve their life sentence even when given extended periods of temporary release and can be returned to prison if they breach their conditions or if they pose a threat to the public. In considering such cases, my approach would not generally differ from that urged by Deputy Flanagan but a change in the law is not necessary.

As regards participation in a criminal organisation, this is already an offence since the introduction of the Criminal Justice Act 2006. Any person who participates in, or contributes to, any activity of a criminal organisation is guilty of an offence. Our law provides for trial without jury. Where it is considered necessary to secure the effective administration of justice, a case can be heard before the Special Criminal Court on the recommendation of the DPP, to whom the power is available.

We have already made clear our intention to proceed with legislation which is intended to provide a clear statutory basis for particular forms of existing Garda surveillance operations and allow for the use of the results of surveillance as evidence, which should be particularly useful in counteracting gangland activities. There is already since 1993 a clear legislative basis for the authorisation of telecommunications intercepts. Heads of a Bill on covert surveillance have been prepared and circulated, and it is my intention it will be submitted to the Government next week with the request for approval to draft a Bill. I am also proceeding with other criminal justice legislation measures, such as allowing for the creation of a DNA database. In circumstances where there is a contraction of Exchequer funding, I was delighted to be able to earmark €18 million for the new DNA database and the new forensic science laboratory to follow on from the legislation we will be bringing forward.

I keep the witness protection programme under constant review and any funding that is necessary for the programme is made available. The Garda Commissioner has reservations about putting the programme on a statutory basis, as had the previous Commissioner. The question of whether the witness protection programme is statutory or otherwise is unlikely to affect the willingness of witnesses to come forward. What we have to recognise is that the willingness or otherwise of witnesses to come forward is dependent on a wider range of factors than simply the level of protection the Garda can offer a witness under the programme, still less whether the programme is statutory. It has to be recognised that in many cases possible witnesses simply do not wish to leave the area where in many cases they have lived all their lives and where their family and friends also live.

Another issue is with regard to the abuse of the right to silence, which Deputy O'Donnell raised. It is already the case — we dealt with this recently in this Chamber — that the law provides that inferences may be drawn at a person's trial from the fact that a person remained silent when asked a question by an investigating garda. Inferences can also be drawn from a failure to account for marks, objects and so forth, and from a failure to account for being at a particular place. In addition, since last year inferences may be drawn from a failure to mention during interview certain facts that are later relied on at trial by the defendant.

As well as a high and unceasing level of front-edge activity, community policing is a very important part of the Garda response and such units have been increased in strength in Limerick. CCTV cameras are now working constantly in most of the major estates in Limerick.

See this speech in context