Dáil debates

Wednesday, 27 January 2016

Criminal Justice (Spent Convictions) Bill 2012 [Seanad]: Report Stage

 

3:25 pm

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal South West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 48:

In page 8, to delete lines 29 to 31.

I oppose this section, which grants unlimited powers to the Garda to seek information relating to an individual's spent convictions when it is investigating a crime. The legislation appears to place the onus on an individual being questioned by the Garda to disclose spent convictions. I believe that does away with the purpose of spent convictions. We are saying that people can be rehabilitated and their convictions will not be taken into account, but then we say that they must disclose them in an interview with the Garda. The section also goes on to relate this to applications for Irish citizenship. A spent conviction is by its nature spent, so why should somebody have to disclose it if he or she is applying for naturalisation in the State? It does not make sense to go down that route.

There is also a lack of clarity. Perhaps the Minister will clarify whether a spent conviction will be removed from the Garda PULSE system when it has been deemed to be, and is classified as, spent. How can we be assured that will be the case, particularly when one notices the propensity of some gardaí to leak information about individuals when it suits them? How does that conform with the requirement for privacy and rehabilitation, particularly with regard to the UK court cases and the human rights implications of that? The onus should not be on the person to disclose it. Indeed, if it is not removed from the PULSE system, the gardaí are already aware of it when they interview the person. That is the reason I propose this amendment.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.