Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent) | Oireachtas source

As the Minister has said, he is proposing a new section 23 which will amend the Criminal Justice Act 1994. The 1994 Act and other Acts were badly needed to keep up with the activities of well-organised and highly trained criminals who had resources oozing out of them and had overseas links on several countries and continents. Like the previous speakers, I praise the brave officers who put their lives at risk when the Criminal Assets Bureau was set up. They did this to try to have some impact on guys who were dancing around the Garda Síochána and the courts, who knew the law as well as Deputy O'Callaghan knows it and who had lawyers at their disposal to find loopholes and to challenge every court from the Circuit Court to the High Court and the Supreme Court. We even set up a new court system to deal with them. I salute the brave members of the Judiciary who had to sit in those courts. As we know, there had to be non-jury trials during times of war for good reason. These trials were not easy because of the intimidation that went on and the fear factor that existed. Gardaí were followed to their homes by people who wanted to know where their families lived. All of this was very subtle, but it was not very nice.

I assure the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, and his officials that I consider the proposed new section to be highly commendable. It is supported by the Opposition party with which the Government has a confidence and supply agreement and by other Members as well. Subsection (a) provides for realisable property to be frozen in criminal proceedings to be procured and disposed of after a conviction has been secured. Of course the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven has to be a flagship in any debate on these issues. It must be recognised and acknowledged.

We are talking about experienced and dangerous criminals who have significant resources, money and networks. It is frightening that a few people who are controlling the drugs situation in towns in my constituency of Tipperary are using children as young as eight years of age to do their drug runs. Property must be seized. This amendment will give the tools of the trade to An Garda Síochána, the Criminal Assets Bureau and the justice system so that these assets can be frozen until the appropriate time comes. We saw a notable case on the television at an early stage. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae mentioned a brave journalist, Veronica Guerin. Many other brave journalists write about these issues. I must compliment those involved with "Prime Time Investigates" as well for their bravery. These people do not like to be messed with or to have questions asked of them. They do not like to be knocked off their perch in any way. They want free rein. They want to be able to do what they wish with who they wish.

The Minister and his predecessor have met a group in Tipperary that is trying to save local communities that are close to where people get on and come off motorways. The road network allows criminals to be in Tipperary in an hour and a half from the capital or wherever else. It is a question of high visibility. I know the Minister is making an effort to give An Garda Síochána more powerful vehicles and air support, etc. It is needed because our police officers are brave. Goodness knows they have been dragged into disrepute over so many inquiries, whistleblowers and God knows what. Such matters have to be dealt with too. We must never forget the ordinary men and women who are on the beat as gardaí. We must remember our very good detectives as well. As I always say, they cannot do anything without the support of the public. It is very important for the public to support them.

I welcome this amendment.

It deals with the freezing of assets and the sending of the file to the Director of Public Prosecutions to back up the charges when people are arrested and arraigned. The charges must then be proved and an eminent justice must sign it. These people would have very valuable assets in many cases. Some gardaí have shown me the pictures and videos after they visited some of those people and the homes were palatial. All of it came from the proceeds of misery visited on ordinary people, including torture, intimidation and abuse. These are crimes against a person, which should be the worst of all. I know there are many Acts on the Statute Book to deal with crimes against a person but we had to get real. This is getting real.

When the Bill leaves the House tonight, how long will it take before its provisions are implemented? Will there be some kind of assessment? Many pieces of legislation are passed here and there are never impact assessments of the ones we oppose. There should certainly be examination of how legislation beds in, whether it functions and if there are unintended consequences. I hope there will not be any but there should be tracking of loopholes that might be challenged in the courts. There should be a period for settling in before coming back to matters like this. We are down to semantics, grammar and words. An order can be frozen while the conviction is being processed through all stages of the courts, and if there is a conviction, the property may be seized, secured and sold.

The purchaser should not be intimidated, as that is also a major issue. There may be subtle messages that people should keep away or the property is a no-go area, so we must deal with such a practice as well. It is a sensitive, tricky and cagey business so we must be twice as cagey as those people. They get up early in the morning because they do not go to bed at night. When the ordinary working man tries to rest, they are prowling on the streets of towns and elsewhere, seeing who they can prey on next. The busy person pays taxes and works, whether as a working man or business man. I support the amendment.

See this speech in context