Alan Kelly (Tipperary North, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Independent and Parties Technical Group for tabling this very important motion on gender-based violence. I also welcome the guests who are in the Gallery.

This is an important debate that raises a number of issues that need urgent and ongoing examination. Last July, my party tabled a similar motion addressing many of the same calls following the courage of Natasha O'Brien. In that motion we specifically called for a review of the practice of suspending sentences, and the criteria used for applying suspended sentences to those convicted of violent crimes. We also called for increased urgency in the development of sentencing guidelines by the Judicial Council, clear guidelines on the use of character references and a comprehensive database of judicial sentences. In addition, we sought reforms to the courts system to better protect and support victims and survivors of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence, including the provision of effective training for legal professionals and the Judiciary.

We called for consistency in sentencing and the provision of access to rehabilitation programmes for perpetrators of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. We sought the introduction of a commissioner to act as an independent advocate and voice for victims and survivors. We looked for a review of Irish Defence Forces regulations in order to deal more proactively with members either accused of, or convicted of, violent crimes.

Another ask was for increased funding from the Government for the provision of additional refuge places, in line with the Istanbul Convention. In addition, we called for increased resources in budget 2025 for Cuan and a commitment to multi-annual funding for rape crisis centres and other domestic, sexual and gender-based violence service providers.

Unfortunately, in the six months since then, little has changed and more shocking cases have emerged. Tackling domestic, sexual and gender-based violence in all its forms is a core, whole-of-government responsibility. It needs input and co-operation across Departments in areas such as health and education, as well as justice. It requires a co-ordinated and sustained response from a host of State agencies and Departments. We cannot confine ourselves to believing that by rolling out yet another criminal justice measure in this House, the problem can be solved: it cannot. DSGBV is much more than just an issue for law reform, although that may well be needed.

Above all, we need more research, evidence and awareness. The motion reflects this when it highlights, for example, the prevalence of rape myths and their impact on the criminal justice system. Myths about rape, and about the criminal justice system's attitude to rape, may well have an impact on a victim's decision whether to report, the attitudes of gardaí who receive a report and the decision whether to prosecute.

The English Law Commission published a consultation paper in 2023 on evidence in sexual offence prosecutions. Rape myths and how to tackle them was high on its agenda. The commission was able to point to local and international research on the issue. We cannot point to similar evidence here because we have not commissioned the necessary research. The Minister should resource Cuan to carry out that work.

I now move to prosecution decisions. The DPP's guidelines for prosecutors state that a prosecution should not be instituted unless there is admissible, relevant, credible and reliable evidence. The guidelines also state that it is not the practice to operate a rule under which conviction would have to be regarded as more probable than acquittal but "Where the likelihood of conviction is low, other factors, including the seriousness of the offence, may come into play in deciding whether to prosecute". There is then listed a string of considerations which, taken together, may well provide reasons that prosecutions are relatively rare.

Paragraph 4.13 states:

... it is important to know if there is independent evidence which supports the complaint. This could be evidence from another witness, or forensic evidence such as fingerprints or DNA evidence from body tissue. This makes the case stronger than one based on one person's word against another.

It is questionable whether this guidance itself is influenced by societal views and myths and merits review. We need accurate information about the influence of myths in judging complainants in sexual offences cases, whether on the grounds that credibility and reliability are doubted by the prosecutor or whether the prosecutor is anticipating the ways that juries and judges will respond to these factors. An anticipatory approach could create a vicious circle if low conviction rates produce a feedback effect that influences later police investigations and assessments of the evidence, including the believability of the complainant, and rules out even more prosecutions.

As the motion outlines, ongoing public education – particularly about consent – remains key. What every complainant is entitled to from the legal system is that its procedures will maximise the quality of their evidence in terms of its completeness, coherence and accuracy and will enable all witnesses to give their best evidence to a fair and unbiased tribunal. That is the minimum complainants deserve.

As the Labour Party outlined in its recent manifesto, and as was recommended in the report by the Citizens' Assembly on Gender Equality, there is a need for a commissioner to act as an independent advocate and voice for victims and survivors in the criminal justice system. Victims must be properly informed on how to make complaints about sentencing and we must ensure that supports are available to them in what is an alien environment for most of them. A key point is that cases must be heard quickly. The longer a victim must wait for justice, the more likely it is that a case will retraumatise them. We strongly support the need to implement Valerie's law and Jennie's law. I am aware the Minister for Justice has an ambitious agenda and I hope he will take both of those laws on board and prioritise them.

See this speech in context