Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when he will implement section 16 of the Criminal Evidence Act 1992 that provides that a video recording of any evidence given by a person under 17 years of age in respect of sexual or violent offences shall be admissible as trial evidence; the reason for the long delay in bringing this provision into effect, having regard to the potential stress for young persons giving evidence in cases involving sexual offences; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41922/06]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Section 16 of the Criminal Evidence Act 1992, as amended, makes provision for the video recording of any evidence given, in regard to a sexual offence or an act involving violence, by a person under 18 years of age through a live television link in proceedings relating to indictable offences. The relevant subsection, (1)(a), was commenced in 1993. It will be noted that this subsection covers persons under 14 years of age also.

Section 16 also makes provision, in subsection (1)(b), for the video recording of a statement made by a person under 14 years of age, in respect of whom a sexual offence or an offence involving violence is alleged to have been committed, during an interview with a member of the Garda Síochána or any other person who is competent for the purpose. It provides that such a video recording shall be admissible at a trial as evidence, provided that the person whose statement was video recorded is available at the trial for cross-examination. I accept Deputy Howlin is not under any illusions in this regard but there appears to be a public misunderstanding that it is possible to simply record a package and give it to a jury and thereby save a child the——

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This was discussed previously at some length.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——possibility of being cross-examined. The existing legislation does not exclude cross-examination and it makes it a condition of the use of this material that the child is available for cross-examination. There is a public misconception that somehow children would be spared the duty of being cross-examined if the defence elected, if we would only introduce a video system.

A committee that was established by my predecessor as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has drawn up good practice guidelines covering a number of areas. The committee made a number of recommendations, including recommendations that sufficient suitable facilities should be available for video recording evidential interviews, and there should be a joint national programme in place for training interviewers, which should be regularly reviewed. In tandem with this, there will be a national training programme for all professionals who are likely to have reference to the guidelines.

I attach the highest importance to the setting up of these facilities. The Secretary General of my Department and the director general of the National Children's Office have taken a personal interest in ensuring this is done as soon as possible. Officials from my Department are actively working on setting up these facilities in conjunction with the Garda Síochána, the Health Service Executive and the Office of Public Works. My Department plans to have a network of suitable facilities available to the Garda Síochána to video record evidential interviews established at a number of locations throughout the country early in 2007.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Most of the Minister's reply was verbatim when I tabled this question originally on 8 June this year, including the explanation of the potential misunderstanding. That was all put on the record at that stage. When I specifically asked whether this measure would be in place by the end of the year, the Minister replied that he hoped so. The most recent response gave no timeframe. The Minister is now saying it will be early next year. We have to move with alacrity on these issues. Where an inter-agency dialogue is required, as in this case between the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Health Service Executive, an important issue like this has to be driven politically. At least, we now have a date for the first time and I will hold the Minister to that date. I ask him to give an assurance to the House that he will personally ensure the date he has given will be realised.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A number of meetings have been presided over at the highest level by officials with responsibility for this matter. They have asked me to indicate to the House that they are determined to ensure there is rapid progress on this matter. I must confess that previously there was a lack of progress which was not defensible.

Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not pretend to be technologically advanced, but is there a problem regarding the use of digital technology, as opposed to old style video technology? Is this causing problems from the point of view of the law underpinning this area?

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am aware that some people have advanced the view that the video recording should be analogue rather than digital because it is easier to see tampering in one format rather than the other.

Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is easier to produce the original.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not clear whether that issue arises but I do not wish to mislead the House in any way.

Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I draw this to the Minister's attention because it is an issue that may need to be examined.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is the Minister aware of the other proposals made in regard to this issue to ensure proceedings are not a deterrent to children such as the use of screens around witness boxes, giving evidence via a live link, the removal of wigs and gowns, the absence of members of the public while evidence is given, the use of communication aids and an examination through an intermediary? Some of these suggestions were presented to the Oireachtas joint committee dealing with child protection. Will the Minister make the necessary provisions or encourage the Courts Service to implement these recommendations?

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am aware of these recommendations because, as the Deputy may recollect, I am a member of the committee to which he referred. I have brought the report to my Department where it is being circulated and evaluated. I pay tribute to the Members of both Houses who participated in the proceedings of that committee. It is unfortunate that two or three controversial issues were cherry-picked out of it for public attention even though the report is a substantial one containing many other issues. I refer, for example, to the current identification parade procedures which I regard as indefensible. Another important matter is the capacity of an alleged perpetrator to personally cross-examine a child victim in court. All those issues have been dealt with comprehensively.

Regardless of the fact that one of the central proposals in the committee's report is dependent on the passage of a referendum, that should not be a comfort zone for official Ireland in looking at the other issues which do not require any delay pending a referendum. I am anxious that all the proposals in the committee's report that do not require legislative change should be addressed as quickly as possible.