Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)

I join Deputy Calleary in congratulating Deputies Stanton and Tuffy on being elected Chairman and Vice Chairman, respectively, of the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality. I look forward to working with them. Deputy Calleary and I will use the committee constructively to deal with legislative and policy matters.

I thank Deputy Calleary for supporting the extension of the operation of this legislation. I share his opinion of the importance of jury service and the jury system, and it is important that we preserve the integrity of the criminal justice system. This includes ensuring those who are engaged in gangland crime do not intimidate juries and can be brought to trial in circumstances where there is a genuine concern that juries may be intimidated.

To date, the legislation has not been invoked to require the usage of the Special Criminal Court in the circumstances envisaged. The operation of the legislation is being extended and we will see the extent to which it will be used this year. One wonders whether the legislation's existence acts as a protection against jury intimidation in that those brought before the courts may be concerned that if there is any suggestion of intimidation, they will be brought before the Special Criminal Court.

I thank Deputy Calleary for his contribution. It is important that, like Deputy Mattie McGrath, we recognise the dangers to which the Garda Síochána is subjected in the work it does in this regard. I thank Deputy Mattie McGrath for his positive and supportive contribution. It was notable that the other Deputies who contributed and opposed this provision commenced their contributions by expressing support for the Garda Síochána, their opposition to gangland crime and their concern to ensure people are brought to justice. Deputy O'Brien argued for additional resources for and recruitment to the Garda Síochána. All of those Deputies who expressed support for the Garda Síochána do so in circumstances in which they are opposing the resolution before the House and disagreeing with the advice of the Garda authorities. This resolution is before the House for one reason, namely, the Garda authorities have asked that it remain in place. They believe it to be important in the fight against gangland crime that it remain in place as it provides for the possibility of trials, in limited circumstances, before the Special Criminal Court in circumstances in which there is a real and present danger to juries. I find it difficult to understand why Deputies would preface their contributions by expressing support for the Garda Síochána and then oppose a resolution which the Garda authorities want passed. It is an inconsistent approach.

Those involved in gangland crime are engaged in a broad range of serious offences, including drug trafficking, drug selling, shooting people on the streets of Dublin and elsewhere, human trafficking and so-called tiger kidnappings. Unfortunately, we in this State are subject to this type of tyranny from those who have no respect for the law or human life, as can be seen from the activities in which they are engaged.

Much has been said about human rights. I believe the role of the Garda Síochána is to protect the human rights of the community, the rights of ordinary people to walk safely in the streets, the rights of people to go about their business without fear of kidnap and the rights of the State to raise revenue in circumstances that are legitimate without thwart by those engaged in illegal importation of cigarettes into the country. There is a broad range of areas that relate to the human rights of the ordinary citizens of this country and, of jurors. Any person asked to serve on a jury is entitled to know we will protect him or her as best we can.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh having congratulated the Garda Síochána and called for extra numbers for the force then provided two interesting solutions in regard to the protection of jurors from intimidation or the possibility of injury or fatality. His prognosis was that we should have quick trials and should screen jurors. I do not know if by quick trials he means that jurors should go into a room for ten minutes and run out again. Trials must take their normal course. If there is a possibility of jurors being intimidated during a trial those who are accused at a trial or those part of a gang who come to view a trial but are not being prosecuted may be able to identify jurors whether the trial is quick or slow. How screening jurors would provide them with protection, I do know.

This is an important measure. I acknowledge that the contributions made by Deputies Halligan and Daly were made in good faith. They both made reference to issues of human rights and trials by jury being a protection against abuse of power. Deputy Daly appears to be of the view that this particular legislation has given rise to a serious erosion of civil rights. The reality is that the Special Criminal Court has not yet been used under this legislation. It is simply a backdrop protection which the Garda authorities believe valuable and have asked that it be kept in place. In the circumstances, I believe we should do so. I commend the resolution to the House.

See this speech in context