Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate on this very important legislation. This is an important discussion because this is a complex Bill on which substantial work has been undertaken to ensure we provide an appropriate balance between assisting the Garda Síochána in the very important work it does by enabling the use of the best modern scientific techniques to identify the perpetrators of crime and address issues relating to missing persons, and protection for individual privacy and human rights.

This is an area of law that should have been addressed many years ago. Ireland is an outlier in Europe in not yet having a DNA database, and similar legislation is in place in at least 15 other European Union countries. My officials will correct me if I am wrong but I understand a DNA database has been in place in the United Kingdom since 1995. We have, therefore, taken a long time to reach this point.

The Garda Síochána, with the assistance of the Forensic Science Laboratory, has been using DNA in the context of identifying perpetrators of crime. However, it is time to change our legislation and establish the database that is so badly required. The restrictive nature of the current statutory framework, which limits the taking of samples for evidential purposes in connection with particular offences, does not facilitate the establishment of a DNA database as an intelligence resource for the Garda. It is vital the Garda has such an intelligence resource.

The databases in place in other European Union countries are used to store DNA profiles taken from known individuals and unknown DNA profiles developed from crime scene stains. They facilitate speculative comparisons between different sets of profiles. In this way, matches can be produced which generate investigative leads for the police. This legislation provides for the establishment of such a quality intelligence tool for the Garda Síochána. As some speakers correctly noted, the Garda Síochána has for some time sought the assistance of a DNA database in the work it does.

I propose to address some specific issues of direct relevance to the legislation before the House, before discussing some of the comments made by Deputies. I recognise and thank Deputy Niall Collins of the Fianna Fáil Party for his support for the legislation. The Deputy asked about the provision of resources to the Forensic Science Laboratory, which is an issue I addressed in my earlier contribution. I am keen to ensure the database will be ready for use as rapidly as possible after the legislation has been enacted. Particular steps must be taken after enactment to bring the legislation into force.

As I stated, the Forensic Science Laboratory has undertaken a substantial amount of preparatory work, including the installation last year of the purpose-built software on which the database will sit. Known as CODIS, this software is used in more than 40 countries, including 18 EU member states. The software installation allows for the storage of profiles in distinct files and has a rapid search capability. It has also been configured to allow mutual searching of European databases, as required by the Prüm Council decision to which I referred.

It is to be expected that there will be a significant increase in the number of samples being submitted to the Forensic Science Laboratory after the legislation has been enacted. The laboratory has been resourced to deal with this increase and is ready to accept increased demands on its services.

Considerable investment in robotic instrumentation has also taken place to ensure the Forensic Science Laboratory is ready to deal with the demands the new database will bring. All forensic samples are processed using robotic instruments, including for sample transfers. This, in combination with a bar code system, acts to ensure the integrity of the sample throughout the process.

The investment in robotic equipment in advance of the database has enabled Forensic Science Ireland to validate its use and introduce it into its routine work. This has already increased output in terms of case numbers and turnaround times. Without being unduly critical, when my predecessor in the Department published a Bill in this area in 2010, the Forensic Science Laboratory had not been resourced, the necessary work had not been undertaken and the necessary equipment had not been put in place.

A sophisticated information management system, the installation of which is proceeding, will facilitate the tracking of all cases and samples from log in through examination to disposal and completion of the process. It will underpin the recording of all processes in the laboratory and will also contain a record of all the personnel who interacted with the system at any stage of analysis and examination. The general thrust of these new installations is to enable a high throughput of samples both from persons and from crime scenes with automated processes and tracking of these samples throughout the entire process from receipt to report. At a time of financial restrictions across the board, as Minister, I have ensured the laboratory could continue to prepare for the enactment of this legislation as it goes through the legislative process in the Houses of the Oireachtas.

Deputy Collins also raised the issue of the Military Police. As Minister for Defence, I am acutely aware of the work of the Military Police and the need to equip it with the resources it needs to do its work both here in Ireland and in troubled spots around the globe. In the context of criminal matters, the Military Police will on occasion liaise with the Garda as the civil authority. The Garda may have a role when particular incidents occur. Department of Justice and Equality officials have met Department of Defence officials and members of the Defence Forces on this issue, including as recently as yesterday.

The Bill is directed at crime generally and at the population as a whole. The Military Police is obviously involved in the detection and prosecution of crime in very limited circumstances - that is, when the suspect is a member of the Defence Forces. This is an important issue and I have asked my officials in the Department of Defence to address this area in the context of defence matters. I have had a conversation about whether during its passage through Parliament provisions in the Bill might be extended to the Military Police or if it would be beneficial to do so in a separate defence Bill. That matter is under active consideration and as we head into Committee and Report Stages I will advise Members of the House on progress being made in those deliberations. In addressing that issue it is important we do not delay the passage of the legislation before the House so that as soon as possible it is available to be of assistance to members of An Garda Síochána in the very important work they do.

Deputies Collins and Mac Lochlainn repeated the concerns of the Irish Council for Civil Liberties over the transmission of DNA information to other EU member states and to countries outside the EU. Predictably Deputy Wallace raised his usual anti-United States phobias. The Bill provides for the transmission of DNA information between EU member states to the extent required by the governing European Union decision and other international instruments. It is beneficial that we so engage with our EU colleagues, with the United States and with other states.

I will give the blindingly obvious example of those who are sexual predators and prey on children - paedophiles - or those who have engaged in sexual offences and have targeted women in doing so. There are no borders to prevent them travelling from one part of the world to another. No borders prevent them from travelling across Europe. No borders restrict, for example, someone who might commit a sexual offence in the United States also doing so as a visitor to this State. There is an interest in ensuring we provide our citizens with the maximum protection. There is an interest in ensuring the maximum co-operation between police forces. Given that we will continue to have those who perpetrate crime on this island and elsewhere, it is in the interest of victims that the maximum scientific technical information is available to identify serial perpetrators of events.

That also applies to a number of other areas. It applies to homicide and to other types of international crime. It may well be that those engaged internationally in the drugs trade may leave a DNA sample on product that readily identifies someone who has imported into Ireland as a resident of the Netherlands or Spain. We cannot have the Garda Síochána fighting international crime with one hand tied behind its back and without the facility of using the most modern scientific techniques available to identify the perpetrators of crime.

In the context of EU law, we have no choice but to provide for the integration of our database. The flip side of this is that the Garda will have access to databases throughout Europe and in any third countries with which we enter into arrangements. The interrogation of databases is anonymous and where there is a hit, as I said in my opening remarks earlier today, any further activity on the case must take place under the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Mutual Assistance) Act 2008. The transmission of DNA samples and profiles is already provided for in that Act and this Bill simply strengthens those provisions to ensure samples and profiles can only be transmitted to countries with safeguards equivalent to ours. Deputies raised that issue, which is one of understandable genuine concern. In dealing with this area, it is important not only to ensure the efficiency of policing and the maximum co-operation in the area of policing, but also that there are similar protections for people's privacy and human rights given that information that is held on database systems can be accessed internationally.

Deputy Mac Lochlainn asked about former offenders who qualified for release under the Good Friday Agreement. The provisions on ex-offenders are quite circumscribed. In particular, no former offender can be forced to provide a DNA sample. A rigorous procedure covers the requesting of a sample. Furthermore the circumstances in which the Garda may seek to have a sample taken are limited. In addition, there is a ten-year watershed after expiry of a sentence after which a person cannot be requested to provide a sample. All told, I believe these provisions are balanced, but I am prepared to consider any further submissions Deputy Mac Lochlainn may wish to make in this regard.

Deputy Mac Lochlainn and others asked why this Bill was not referred to the Irish Human Rights Commission. The commission provided extensive comment on the 2010 Bill. In its preparation, this Bill has taken account of the views expressed by the Irish Human Rights Commission on issues that arose under the 2010 Bill. it is important that we do so. The provisions I detailed earlier today, which are very different in this Bill with regard to the retention and destruction of samples, are examples of issues that would have been addressed by the Irish Human Rights Commission.

Deputy Halligan asked about the destruction of samples and removing profiles from databases. Some other Deputies also adverted to that issue. As Deputies Seán Kyne, Finian McGrath and others noted, the legislation contains very extensive provisions addressing that area.

They are extensive and important in the context of human rights and privacy issues. There is no question, as has been suggested by one Deputy, that under the Bill there is some presumption of guilt on the part of individuals. The presumption of innocence is a central tenet of our legal system and it is not impacted by the legislation. In any event, the legislation is of substantial importance and many Deputies acknowledged as much in their speeches. In fairness, I acknowledge that Deputy Mac Lochlainn and Sinn Féin are supportive of the Bill. Quite rightly, Deputy Mac Lochlainn raised issues as he is entitled to do.

I am keen to thank various Deputies although I realise now I am at risk of leaving someone out. Even in the case of Deputies who spoke when I was not here, I am aware of their contributions. I thank Deputies Peter Fitzpatrick, Paul Connaughton, Dara Murphy, Simon Harris, Seamus Healy, Ann Phelan, Anne Ferris, Seán Kenny, Thomas Pringle, Eamonn Maloney, Michael Conaghan and Seán Kyne for their supportive comments. I hope I have addressed some of the issues that were raised during the course of their comments.

Deputy Dara Murphy made an important point that is worth coming back to and I will mention it briefly. He noted that this is landmark legislation which will not only assist the Garda in the work that it does, but will provide the force with assistance for decades to come and that it is remarkably important legislation for victims of crime. If a person is a victim of a serious crime, it can stay with him or her for many years and have a lasting impact on his or her capacity to enter into relationships; it can impact on his or her coping capacity or his or her sense of freedom to go about their daily lives unhindered. For too many people there is a fear that they could become victims again. For every victim of serious crime, one of the questions that remain with them is whether An Garda Síochána can bring to justice the perpetrator of the crime. For many, it proves to be the case, but for others it does not prove to be the case. Many are concerned in cases where they have been a victim that they may be revisited by the same criminal or that whatever they suffered may be inflicted on others. This legislation will not only assist An Garda Síochána in the work it does, but it will give many more victims of crime peace of mind in future because of the capacity it has in the establishment of the DNA database to assist the Garda to identify serial offenders with speed.

Some individuals can literally go on a crime binge and terrorise communities. Recently, I was made aware of a case in a local community where they had suffered nine burglaries in the space of a few weeks. The Garda was trying to identify the perpetrator. Eventually, the perpetrator was caught exiting from a home that they visited a second time. When the necessary work was done, it was established that the individual was the person responsible for the nine offences that occurred. I have no wish to say anything more about it than that because I do not want to identify the location or the individual or do anything that could prejudice the prosecution. However, if this individual was a previous offender, if the Garda had a DNA profile or database and if, when the first crime was committed, there was some DNA samples left - it might have been as simple as a hair follicle at the scene of the crime - then it may well have been that the identity of the perpetrator would have been known earlier and that the further crimes they committed could have been readily prevented. That is a simple example of the benefits of this legislation to victims of crime and in crime prevention and that is why I maintain this is landmark legislation of great importance to the public and of great assistance to An Garda Síochána. Again, it establishes us as having the same scientific systems as our EU counterparts and brings us to where we can connect with them in the context of the exchange of information.

I have been trying to resist the temptation to reference Deputy Wallace's extraordinary contribution on the Bill. Deputy Wallace was the only Deputy who spoke who is opposed to the legislation. It was not entirely clear exactly what he would do should there be a vote on it. I have no idea when I sit down whether he will appear in the House to oppose it or whether he simply delivered a speech in opposition to it. Anyway, I have noted with great interest Deputy Wallace's contributions on matters relating to assisting the Garda, protecting victims of crime, preventing crime and bringing offenders to justice. I have compiled a list of the exotic contributions of Deputy Wallace in several debates in recent times. If I were to sum up his very interesting perspective on the law, protecting our citizens and protecting people in the communities he represents in this House, it would be along the following lines. First, the Garda should not have the facility of a DNA database. That seems evident from his contribution. Second, based on a contribution he made a week or ten days ago, no one should ever be fined by the courts for the various reasons he offered. His view was that it does not matter what a person does and it does not matter how wealthy a person is, the courts should never impose a fine. Further, no one should ever have a fixed ticket charge cancelled even when it is wrongly issued to the wrong person. Fines are out but fixed ticket charges are compulsory even if a person receives such a charge and it turns out a mistake has been made about the registration number of the car.

The view that people are entitled to selectively break the law also seems to be a philosophy of Deputy Wallace in the context of various tranches of legislation enacted in the House. Another principle that he adheres to with great consistency is that at every opportunity the integrity of the Garda Síochána should be attacked and undermined. He has another principle relating to certain countries, although in the case of one of the countries to which that principle applied it seems to have been changing its approach since the recent presidential election there. The approach of Deputy Wallace with regard to the United States could be summed up by saying that America is the great Satan.

Finally, it seems to be his approach that DNA data should never be used to identify perpetrators of homicide, rapes or sexual offences or to establish the identity of an individual who has gone missing, nor should it ever be used to establish the innocence of an individual where there is an alleged miscarriage of justice. That is an interesting and exotic perspective of what is in the interests of his constituents. It is completely inconsistent with the views of every other Member with regard to the use of DNA and the importance of a DNA database.

I will conclude by saying something I said at the start of my speech, although I realise my officials occasionally find this embarrassing. I thank the officials in the Department of Justice and Equality and the Attorney General's office. They have done an extraordinary job in producing comprehensive legislation which I have long sought to have enacted in the House.

Unfortunately, I have been so long in the House that I can remember persecuting a former Minister for Justice many years ago to enact the legislation we are repealing in this Bill. There was a time when DNA databases did not exist but other neighbouring countries were using DNA in the investigation of crime when we were not and we lacked any facility to use it. I am going back to a time when I would have piloted legislation into this House to provide for the use of the DNA to identify the parentage of children where there was a dispute about that.

It was a time when I was putting under pressure a former Minister for Justice to enact the legislation to which I referred earlier, which originally provided for the use of DNA in the fight against crime.

I thank Members for their supportive comments. As Minister for Justice and Equality, it is a privilege to be in a position to be able to pilot this legislation through the House. An enormous amount of work has been done on this Bill and I hope and believe that all the issues raised in respect of the 2010 Bill, some of which I raised myself as a criticism, have been addressed. On Committee Stage, however, were Deputies to table constructive amendments to improve the Bill, I would be very happy to take them on board. I already have mentioned that in dealing with one or two areas, including data protection, I intend to bring forward some amendments myself on Committee Stage. I will conclude by commending the Bill to the House.

See this speech in context