Brendan Kenneally (Waterford, Fianna Fail)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. Every effort must be made to tighten up the criminal justice system and tip the scales in favour of the law abiding citizen, who is increasingly fearful of walking down a main street in Ireland at present for fear of being caught in the crossfire between rival gangs or as an innocent bystander at the occurrence of a criminal activity. This is an exaggeration in the case of some towns, but for many larger centres of population it is too much of a reality to ignore. If there are ways of putting pressure on criminals, I believe we must seize them with willing hands.

In welcoming this measure, I wish to focus on the provisions in the Bill regarding European arrest warrants and the official approval for the possession of firearms. The introduction of European arrest warrants is a typical example of the success of the European ideal, in that it has almost eliminated the necessity for extradition treaties or proceedings between countries in Europe. This is a much easier way of dealing with criminals, who are now more mobile than ever. If we still had to go through complicated extradition proceedings, it is possible that some European countries could become a safe haven for criminals from other jurisdictions, including Ireland. Anything that is done to simplify the movement of criminals between European countries which have just legal systems is to be welcomed. Traditionally, it took up to nine months to have a person extradited from another country. This has now been reduced to just six weeks.

There is also the simple yet hallowed principle that "justice delayed is justice denied". If the accused is found innocent, the speedier the passage to that conclusion, the better. Likewise, when dealing with a person who is eventually convicted of a crime, the sooner he or she is taken out of circulation, the better. Extradition has always been complicated and time consuming, as well as being a slow and expensive procedure, and if the provisions of section 7 speed up and streamline the process of moving a person accused of serious crime from one European jurisdiction to another, I support it.

I am glad that section 8 recognises the logic of using modern technology to transmit necessary information from one jurisdiction to another. I applaud the Minister for trying to break through the barrier of tradition, which looks suspiciously at any attempt to modernise the system. I am all too conscious that the justice system, with its power over liberty and legal rights, should not endanger those in any way, but it should be possible for computer and technology experts to be able to build in adequate safeguards to operate the system. In the current climate, every effort should be made to cut costs where safely possible and without encroaching unnecessarily on people's rights and liberty.

An important element of the procedure is that member states can no longer frustrate the extradition of their citizens to another member state. As the European elections draw near, euro-sceptics are again raising this issue. I wonder if Declan Ganley and Libertas fall into that category, as they take a less than enthusiastic view of the current situation. Many provisions of this Bill are technical but they constitute a genuine and honest effort to make the system flow more freely.

I also welcome the provision in section 10 of the power for a garda to arrest without warrant a person he believes to be part of an Schengen information system, SIS, alert. This was provided for under the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003, but is dealt with in far more detail in this Bill. It makes adequate provision for the accused and arrested person to have their case heard with all due speed. Section 45 authorises gardaí to photograph and fingerprint persons arrested under the original Act, to enable them to verify a person's identity. Until now, gardaí had no power to do this. However, we must be realistic about the nature of the time in which we live, the violent nature of criminals, even in Ireland, and the fact that cheap flights allow criminals to flit around Europe with relative ease. I am aware that the concept of photographing and fingerprinting suspects raises the hackles of the civil rights lobby but even with the introduction of the particularly demanding US identification procedures, there has not been a rash of complaints about the system. We must be cognisant of what is happening elsewhere in the world as well as having regard to the conditions in Ireland.

In recent days, there was further evidence of the expansion of violent crime in this country. Last week, gardaí confronted armed raiders who were in the process of committing a crime. A shotgun was being held to the head of a security guard and it was obvious that his life was in danger. To think otherwise is to exclude oneself from the real world. Luckily, gardaí were on the alert and on the scene in a very short time. As a result of the obvious threat to the welfare if not the life of the captive, and after what appears to have been adequate and proper warning on the part of the gardaí, the raiders were fired on. As a result, one person died and another was wounded. The Garda Ombudsman Commission is investigating and has yet to report. In the absence of shrill condemnation of Garda violence, we can accept that there was legitimate threat to innocent life and liberty. I regret, as does anyone with any sensitivity and feeling, the loss of life in this case. However, we must have regard for the particular circumstances and the type of reckless adventure in which the raiders were engaged. I commend the gardaí involved on their vigilance and courage and hope they do not suffer any psychological problems as a result of their legitimate actions. I reiterate that I regret the loss of life in this case. However, we must have equal regard to the seriousness of the situation that presented to the gardaí.

Given the widespread disregard for the rights of people to walk the streets, carry on commerce and live a normal life, such an event was waiting to happen. I hope lessons can be learned from the incident and that those planning a similar adventure may think again. The Garda has set down a marker in showing it is on top of the criminal threat, that its intelligence is reliable and that it can respond quickly and efficiently. In particular, its effectiveness in bringing large numbers of serious criminals to justice in Limerick is to be commended. However, when one gang member is taken off the streets, there is invariably another to take his place. With the help of the provisions in the Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Bill 2009, I am confident the success rate in the prevention and solving of crimes will rise dramatically. In addition, we have the Schengen information system, SIS, a provision which attempts to tip the balance back in favour of law and order and away from the criminal fraternity. It offers a course that is very favourable to this country and which puts further pressure on those involved in criminal activity.

Part 4 deals with the licensing of firearms. I am in favour of limiting the spread of firearms where possible, without unduly impinging on the right of reasonable people to operate within the framework of legitimate hunting and gun clubs, using weapons approved by the Garda. We have an unhappy history with firearms in this State. Far too often, they have been used in anger against law-abiding people and members of the Garda, with serious or fatal consequences. The greater the number of firearms, the greater the possibility of injury or death either as a consequence of an accident or through their deliberate use.

I have no desire to be a killjoy or to take away any legitimate right to own and use a firearm, whether for the containment of vermin, for example, or for legitimate and controlled leisure activities. In the late 1960s, all handguns and high-calibre rifles were confiscated by the State and taken into secure storage until such time as the political and security climate would allow for their general use. That point was reached some years ago but since then, there has been a staggering proliferation in the ownership of handguns. Some of this is accounted for by those persons whose weapons were previously confiscated returning those weapons to usage in order to resume their former pastimes. However, from a situation in 2003 where there was only one legally held weapon of this type, the number has now mushroomed to some 1,800, according to the most recently published data. As I said, the more guns there are in circulation, the greater the possibility of their being used illegally.

I recently saw a report on the evening news about a man in north Leinster who entered a school armed with a knife in search of a boy with whom he had some history of conflict. Upon his conviction, the sentencing judge commented that we are lucky in this State that we have not had a more serious incident involving guns in schools. The judge observed that in other jurisdictions, the law has been too liberal in this regard and that we have enough problems in this State without replicating the most dangerous aspects of life in other countries by facilitating through our laws the proliferation of firearms. The problem is that the law as it stands is open to varying interpretations and is applied with varying degrees of flexibility in different parts of the State. For instance, Wexford is seen as a liberal county in regard to firearms licensing. District officers in various parts of the State may have a different emphasis, resulting in disparity between regimes in these districts.

At a recent appearance before the Committee of Public Accounts, the Garda Commissioner, Mr. Fachtna Murphy, argued that he could not offer guidelines to his superintendents in this area because individual courts were overruling the recommendations of the Garda not to provide licences for handguns. Gardaí find themselves having to issue licences for Glock handguns, the type frequently used in murders in this State, at a time when criminals are using them to further their own ends. This is unacceptable. We must have definitive guidelines for the issue of firearms, particularly handguns. As the judge remarked in the case to which I referred, we are fortunate that there has not as yet been a serious shooting incident in a school. However, European and American norms are arriving here in every other strand of life. I hope that in making guns so freely available, we are not facilitating another Columbine or Hungerford.

According to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, 53,000 rifles and 77,000 shotguns are licensed in the State. Taken in conjunction with the unusually large number of handguns, this works out at one weapon for every 17 people. It is little wonder we are seeing an increase in murders involving firearms. Some gun owners are far too careless with their weapons. The Garda has warned that criminals are targeting households with gun dogs in the fairly certain knowledge that weapons are held in those homes. We are all aware that members of legitimate gun clubs want to use their firearms for purely recreational purposes. In principle, I have no difficulty with that. However, with a gun comes a great responsibility. The Garda is well placed to establish whether people are willing to discharge their responsibilities, whether they will be careful users of the weapon, protecting it and storing it properly, or whether they might have criminal intent.

I have had representations from members of clubs who are training for the Olympic Games and are genuinely afraid that their activities will be curtailed. I ask the Minister to take this concern into account in this legislation. For example, I received a letter today from a person in Dublin on this matter. The correspondent explained that he has participated in shooting sports since 1990, representing his country internationally on many occasions, most recently at the world handgun championships in Indonesia in 2008. There are many people representing Ireland in such disciplines. When it comes to winning gold medals in Olympic Games or other competitions, there are few disciplines where we have the opportunity to compete at the same level as athletes in other countries. However, the various shooting disciplines offer such an opportunity. These are sports we should encourage rather than discourage. I am confident the legislation could be tweaked to allow superintendents to issue licences to such persons on condition that they have adequate secure storage for the firearms and that their homes are fitted with alarms. If such regulations were in place, any concerns in this regard would be allayed. These people only want to use their firearms for legitimate purposes. While I support the Bill, I am strongly of the view that there should be a concession for those who use handguns solely for the purpose of competition. The numbers involved are small but we must not curtail their activity.

I am pleased that the popular paint ball centres, stage props and starting guns will be permitted on licence from a superintendent under the imitation firearms prohibitions. It has been suggested that legally held firearms for hunting and other recreational purposes should be stored in a Garda station and only taken out and returned at weekends. This would not be practical due to constraints on Garda time, particularly in rural Garda stations. I cannot envisage a procession of hunters into a Garda station on Friday evenings and again on Monday mornings to withdraw and deposit their legally held weapons. That would expose owners to even more risk, identifying them to potential thieves as gun owners. The new restrictions on holding firearms are sad but necessary. After the Northern Troubles had been resolved, we believed we could resume normal life and guns could be used for sport and recreation. The criminal threat has made this impossible. We see the parallel between the paramilitary threat of previous decades and the present threat from criminal gangs. Unfortunately, just as special provisions were necessary for the control of political violence in the past, so too they are required to control the current criminal threat.

Section 42 amends the Criminal Justice Act 1984 to allow for staff of the Garda technical bureau to certify that material which is being referred to in court is the result of work carried out by the Garda technical bureau and is sufficient evidence of the facts stated, thereby obviating the need for Garda technical bureau staff to give oral evidence in court of such matters in every circumstance. Will the Minister clarify whether this provision refers to evidence which, in the normal course of events, would not give rise to a requirement for cross-examination on the basis that the person who has given the evidence is making statements of fact only? If that is the case, I fully support the provision as it will ensure that valuable Garda time is not wasted by requiring gardaí to wait for God knows how long before being able to make statements of fact in court. In such circumstances, the time of Garda witnesses would be better utilised by deploying them on the streets fighting crime and acting as a source of comfort to citizens. This is also true of other gardaí who spend hours hanging around courtrooms waiting to give evidence in cases involving the most minor of offences. There must be better ways of dealing with Garda evidence in court. I ask the Minister to clarify the position regarding section 42.

Notwithstanding the reservations I have expressed regarding the provisions on firearms used for recreational purposes, for example, in gun clubs, I am pleased with the contents of the Bill. I wholeheartedly support the legislation and commend the Minister on introducing it.

See this speech in context