Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

It has. It worked in the area of witnesses who had recanted their statements. Their previous statements were accepted by the court. It has worked in a number of other cases also. It has worked and the world has not fallen in. All the hullabaloo predicted at the time by the 200 lawyers did not happen. I hazard a guess the same will be true in this case.

This Bill has been criticised for provisions that are not even in it. I remind Deputies of the reason I brought this forward. The catalyst for the legislation was not my meeting with Steve Collins - I only met him a couple of weeks ago - but the Roy Collins murder. Clearly, that was different from any murder that has taken place in the State. It was an attack on the people, the State and on the criminal justice system. If the Oireachtas did not respond to that attack, we would be ignoring the level of threat and intimidation communities suffer in their daily lives. We did not base our view on what the State solicitor had said, because we made our decision before he spoke on the issue. I did not base it on what Paul Williams very eloquently said on a "Newstalk" programme recently. Nobody would second guess him - he is one of the most respected investigative crime journalists in the country.

The Government had the benefit of the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, at Cabinet meetings and had to take on board what he said. Deputy O'Donnell is on the record of this House as saying there has been jury intimidation in his area. The Minister of State, Deputy Power, said the same. Others mentioned intimidation to me privately. Deputy Finian McGrath referred to it happening in areas he represents. To be fair, that information is all anecdotal.

The evidence brought to Cabinet by me, aside from what the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, said was the hard evidence gardaí have garnered recently, particularly in the aftermath of the Roy Collins murder. I respect Deputy Rabbitte's amendment. It is important to emphasise that there is provision for a 12-month review in the Bill. We will review and examine what has happened over the past year when we come to conduct a review. It may well be that the DPP will not have brought a prosecution and I will fully understand that.

The Oireachtas has to give a signal to the DPP and the wider community, particularly those directing and participating in organised gang crime, that if one participates in it, one will bear the full brunt of the available legislation and will go before a non-jury trial. Therefore, we are removing from the equation any attempt by the people behind the person who pulls the trigger to attack and intimidate jurors. One is reducing the level of civilian interaction in such trials.

I heard what was said about Mr. Justice Carney, but I have to listen to what the Garda Síochána said about intimidation. I respectfully suggest that gardaí are on the ground day in and day out working in this area. I have to listen to people such as the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, who said when people in his area receive a jury summons they shake like leaves because they are afraid. We also have to look at the statistics on gangland crime trials. When they are held, particularly in Limerick, the level of jury participation drops dramatically and increases when such trials are no longer taking place.

It is the view of Government that it is important to send out a strong signal that these offences will be tried in a non-jury court unless the DPP directs otherwise. I strongly urge this House to follow that so a signal is sent to those who are orchestrating these crimes and sending out patsies to do their dirty work. The gardaí have been very successful in putting away the people who pulled the trigger, but have not been as successful with those who have been orchestrating crime.

We have introduced this Bill to put a greater onus on the system to respond and to try to make it easier for prosecutions. One of the major difficulties we had was in trying to establish what constitutes a criminal gang. It is much more difficult to define than a paramilitary organisation. The last section we divided on concerned the expert evidence of a garda. It was a stupid decision by the Opposition and I could not understand it, but it is its prerogative.

It is vital that we send out a strong signal to the wider community that the State will protect it, and to the DPP that all of these offences will be contained in the Bill. I accept judges are able to put prejudice out of their minds when dealing with these issues, but by leaving the matter to the DPP, if he decides a case must be tried in the Special Criminal Court, as is the case currently, it may be that there is perhaps an element of prejudice in such a decision.

The Oireachtas has been convulsed every time there has been a murder. I do not say this is a political way, but people on the other side of the House, when there is a murder, criticise the Government knowing full well we do our level best in regard to the resources we provide to the Garda. I do not accept what Deputies have said because those who represent Limerick, Finglas and other areas will attest to the fact that gardaí in those areas are extremely well-resourced. It a criticism Deputy Rabbitte sometimes makes, namely, that there are more gardaí per head of population in Limerick than in his constituency. That is because there are particular difficulties in those geographic areas.

I strongly urge the House not to divide on this issue and accept what the Government is trying to do, that is, raise the level of this type of insidious, organised gang crime to that which the House previously adopted regarding the paramilitary threat against the State.

See this speech in context