Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

I wish to share time with Deputies Connaughton and Heather Humphreys. I thank my colleagues for allowing me to go first, as I have to travel some distance to a meeting. In fact, I should be on the road now.

I welcome the Bill to the House. Like other speakers, I am concerned about ensuring that civil human rights are recognised and accorded in all situations appertaining to the execution of warrants, particularly when a person is being extradited from one jurisdiction to another. We have often seen instances in which the country where the alleged crime was committed had different attitudes from those that prevail here. It is important that we make absolutely certain this legislation is foolproof, so that anybody who falls within the remit of the Act receives his or her full entitlements in terms of natural justice, due process and recognition of his or her human rights. That applies in all instances.

An issue I have raised on numerous occasions in the House in recent years is that of organised crime and international criminal gangs. They are growing in stature and importance to such an extent that in some jurisdictions they challenge the power and authority of governments. We are in a worldwide community. We no longer live in our own little haven of peace and security. We are now subject to forces outside as well as within. Sometimes, there is an accord between the forces within and those outside, particularly on issues such as the drug trade, and there are all kinds of abhorrent abuses. It is essential that our legislation is as watertight as possible to ensure that in this jurisdiction we present the strongest possible and most robust defence against the elements of criminality. My reason for saying this is that everyone in the House knows of numerous examples of people who are living in the lap of luxury outside this jurisdiction having committed various heinous crimes within it. The number of such people is increasing. Similarly, there are probably people here, the crimes of whom we are not aware. The lesson to be learned is that whatever extradition agreements and arrangements we have, states inside and outside the European Union must expect reciprocal arrangements because there is no sense having in place an extradition arrangement unless it works in both directions and over as wide a geographic area as possible.

I do not need to illustrate the kinds of problems we have had in this jurisdiction in the past 20 years in regard to the illegal drugs trade and serious crime in general. While it is all very fine for us to wring our hands and tear out our hair over every set of circumstances that arises, we must ultimately decide what we think about these issues and what we believe should be done to address them. It is a question of whether we have the guts to address them.

The Bill contains references to remanding in custody. I presume that, in these cases, the prisoner is always remanded in custody. The bail laws in this country are being flouted left, right and centre. It is utterly appalling to witness what has occurred in recent years. Prisoners on bail have reoffended not only once but twice. Even after having been prosecuted for re-offending, they offend. The circumstances are laughable.

There has been a degeneration of respect for law and authority. Criminals before the courts regularly give two fingers to the cameras and show contempt and disdain for everything for which the State stands and for the people who represent it. It is sad to see this. How often have we seen prisoners who are being photographed outside court offering two fingers to the cameras? This is the best they have to offer. They are giving two fingers not only to the cameras but also to the State and law-abiding citizens. While I, like everybody else, am most anxious that due process take place and that people's human rights be recognised and provided for, I believe we must consider closely how we deal with these circumstances. Unfortunately, we seem to have developed a laissez-faire attitude to crime in general. This evolves with the passage of time.

Since I first became a Member of this House, there have been quite considerable grounds for individuals, including those who might look forward to a life of crime, concluding that crime pays after all, that it is not a bad idea and that everybody should become involved. I do not want to go down the road that many might expect me to go down in the climate in which we live; suffice it to say there is a considerable body of opinion in the country that suggests some of those who have sought refuge outside this jurisdiction might well have a case to answer. It is believed that, while due process should prevail, those people have a case to answer none the less.

The Bill repeals certain aspects of the 2003 Act, thus illustrating how quickly legislation can become dated. Some Acts are more than 100 years old while others are found to be deficient in the space of two or three years and do not work as intended. Legislation should not become deficient so quickly in most circumstances.

The Bill states:

A new section 15(5A) is inserted which provides that the person must be surrendered to the issuing state concerned not later than 10 days after the new date fixed, or else discharged. This provision is also intended to reflect more closely the provisions of the Framework Decision.

I can well understand this provision. It prevents the State from abusing the system technically in order to achieve a particular result. I have no difficulty with that.

Section 14 states:

The following is substituted for section 21 of the Act of 2003:

"21.—(1) The Minister may direct that a person remanded in custody under this Act or detained in a prison or remand institution pursuant to an order under subsection (1) or (2) of section 15 or (1) or (2) of section 16 be removed to a hospital or any other place if the Minister considers that in the interests of the person's health [...]"

I presume this implies the Minister must have regard to medical opinion. My comments are not at all a reflection on the present Minister or any other. In the future, a Minister might, at a whim, decide a person should be transferred to a hospital, whence he might manage to escape. We need good solid grounds for decisions and to have professional information and backup to justify decisions.

This is the kind of legislation about which one could talk for much longer than five or ten minutes. I am sure my colleagues are saying the same thing and hope I will sit down soon.

See this speech in context