Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The exclusion of spent convictions from general court proceedings is to be welcomed. The Irish Penal Reform Trust has queried the circumstances that might require courts to deviate from this general approach. They are described in section 6(2) of the Bill as circumstances in which "justice cannot be done except by so admitting or requiring the evidence" of spent convictions. The provisions of section 6(3), allowing exclusions to be made in a number of specific types of legal proceeding, seem reasonable and proportionate. However, I suggest that the exclusions set out in sections 6(3)(c) and 6(3)(d) are vague and require further clarification. I believe we are opening an opportunity for an abuse of power at the expense of the individual who is before the court. I suggest that it is something that should be avoided. The idea that former offences may be thrown back like this as the prosecuting authority sees fit just does not stack up. It completely militates against the whole idea of deeming convictions to be spent convictions in order to give people a clean bill of health in respect of their former offences. I do not know how anyone could make a rational argument in favour of this unusual measure. Under no circumstances would I give a prosecuting body this power in these circumstances because I would be just looking for it to be abused.

See this speech in context