Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

The revised definition of organised crime is simpler. The notion of the period of time contained in the 2006 Act has been removed and it is also now clear that it is enough for two persons to act in concert rather than three persons, as before. It is no longer necessary to show that the commission of a serious offence was to obtain a financial or material benefit. For example, directing the intimidation of a witness or a juror without proving financial benefit would be encompassed by the new definition but not by the old one.

I understand there has been one successful prosecution since the commencement of this suite of legislation regarding organised crime in the 2006 Act. The person in question pleaded guilty. When we considered this legislation in the context of the aftermath of the two recent murders of Shane Geoghegan and Roy Collins, one factor emerged strongly from the advice we received. We provide the legislation in this House but the Director of Public Prosecutions, based on the evidence garnered by the Garda Síochána, directs what sections are to used. I have no say as to whether a prosecution should be taken under section 70, or any other section, of the 2006 Act. It is worth emphasising that fact.

Since the passing of the suite of legislation related to organised gang crime, the issue of participation in particular of a gangland organisation has proven difficult. It has not been used as often as this House would have liked. In the revised definition, we have made it simpler and easier to prove participation in a gang. Coupled with the surveillance legislation which I hope will be passed, the Garda can use both pieces of legislation in a better way to prove participation or the overall involvement in organised gang crime.

This was an effort to simplify the process and to make it somewhat easier to ground a prosecution. Time will tell on this and given that we have built into the legislation an annual review, the House may revisit the issue to see if it has been successful. This House has moved on a number of occasions to change legislation as events unfolded. We did that in the case of mandatory sentencing for drug offences, as the Oireachtas came back on three occasions recently to amend legislation and to give a strong signal on the gravity of the serious offences relating to drug crime. That is the rationale behind this definition and I thank Deputies for their acceptance that this is necessary.

See this speech in context