Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I acknowledge the points raised by Deputy Wallace in the context of this series of amendments dealing with the provision of information and do not doubt the sincerity of the points raised by him. A number of different issues are raised in these amendments and I will address them in turn. I see a difficulty with the insertion of the words "all relevant" in section 6, which is proposed in amendments Nos. 12 to 14, inclusive, in terms of workability. I go back to what I said earlier about ensuring that what we enshrine in legislation by way of explicit provisions has a practical effect and that the legislation will not be ambiguous, uncertain or unduly cumbersome. Amendment No. 12 would require all relevant information regarding significant developments in an investigation to be provided upon the request of the victim. The scope of the information that could be designated as relevant could encompass the entire case files with many documents, some of which by their nature might be required to remain confidential or would be so on the basis of an investigation taking place.

Amendment No. 13 would require all relevant information regarding a decision not to pursue or, indeed, to cease an investigation to be provided. The reasons for not pursuing or ceasing an investigation could be based on a large number of sources and documents, all of which could be relevant to that decision.

The production of all relevant documents relating to a decision to discontinue a prosecution, as provided for in amendment No. 14, would require the DPP to produce a potentially vast number of files, some of which would be confidential, in order to satisfy this requirement. I have no doubt that such a requirement would place a pretty significant burden on the office of the DPP and I wonder what the benefit of what might be an unreasonable disclosure to the victim would be. I do not see how the victim would at all times benefit here.

We need to look at the objectives of the victims' directive, an important goal of which is to keep the victim informed of the progress of an investigation, not to give him or her access to all of the material that is relevant to it. These amendments could require vast amounts of information to be provided to victims going far beyond the scope of the directive or, indeed, going far beyond what in the circumstances might be the needs and requirements of victims. It is important we remain proportionate here and I do not believe these amendments are proportionate and even appropriate, so I am not in a position to accept them. I believe the legislation adequately covers in practice what in the circumstances might be required to fulfil the stated aim of Deputies Mick Wallace and Clare Daly.

The changes proposed in amendment No. 15 are already provided for in section 7(2) of the Bill. Section 7(2)(j) requires the victim to be given information on the sentence imposed or any orders related to the judgment. Any conditions under which a sentence is suspended form part of that sentence and any conditions attached to a post-release supervision order form part of the order in any event so the provision of this information is already required under the Bill. I do not believe the insertions of provisions for subcategories of sentences and orders is necessary because we have already provided for the outcome in any event.

3 o’clock

Amendment No. 16 seeks to add bail conditions which relate to the victim to the list of information he or she is entitled to receive. On Committee Stage we added to section 7(2)(a) an amendment which actually meets that issue. The remainder of amendment No. 16 seeks to have information provided for victims on the procedures to be followed where a bail condition is breached, including information on the offence of witness intimidation.

Amendment No. 17 would require additional information to be provided for a victim on request on various procedures and offences. I agree with Deputy Mick Wallace that this information is important and should be provided for victims. Most of it will be provided under section 14 of the Bill. Under that section, every victim must be individually assessed to identify his or her protection needs and protection measures required, in addition to special measures during the investigation, or special measures that may be necessary in the context of core proceedings. The protection measures that must be provided for in every circumstance where the victim would benefit from them explicitly include information and advice on personal safety, information and advice on harassment orders, applications for bail add conditions of bail, all of which must be discussed with the victim at the time of the assessment. The section already provides in a more comprehensive and victim-focused manner for the making available of most of the information which Deputies Mick Wallace and Clare Daly seek in their amendments to have provided.

While I am conscious of the time - as we are on Report Stage, I might not get another opportunity to speak - in respect of the harassment order under the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017, a range of amendments to this Bill will be necessary to take account of the 2017 Act, particularly with regard to the provision of criminal evidence. The amendments are being prepared and will be introduced in the Seanad. Consideration is being given to whether information on harassment orders under the Act might explicitly be included in the definition and protection measures in this Bill. Where such an order is made, information will be provided for the victim under section 7.

See this speech in context