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

Question 5: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the cases he was referring to in regard to statements he made in which he referred to 24 associates of a deceased criminal having been arrested, of whom 23 were granted bail despite objections by the Garda; if he will confirm that the Garda objected to bail in all cases; if not, the number of cases in which it objected to bail; the offences with which people were charged in each case; the number of such cases where bail was initially refused but then granted by a higher court; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6944/07]

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

I refer to my answer to Questions Nos. 422, 464 and 465 of 31 January.

The House will appreciate that the granting of bail is a matter for the courts and that the Director of Public Prosecutions who is independent in the performance of his functions represents the State for the purpose of dealing with such applications.

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

We can take that as read.

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

Moreover, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on the circumstances in which bail may have been granted, or refused, in particular cases. I can confirm, however, that I was made aware by the Garda authorities of their concern that in a substantial number of cases involving operations they had launched against gun and drugs criminals, bail had been granted despite Garda objections. It would be wrong of me to give a public account of the precise details of Operation Oak, the exact number arrested under the operation and the precise position or relationship of those persons in the web connected with Martin Hyland. To do so would seriously undermine the effectiveness of the operation and compromise Garda intelligence. Suffice it to say that well in excess of 23 persons were arrested in the course of this operation.

I have made it clear previously that in making this point I am in no way impugning the independence or decisions of the courts. I have accepted, however, that changes need to be made to the operation of our bail laws. I announced a series of proposals in this regard last week. I do not believe any Member of this House would seriously contend that difficulties are not being encountered in the operation of our bail laws.

The proposals which I will be bringing forward in the criminal justice Bill include measures designed to restrict access to bail by those accused of gangland type offences. A senior Garda will be able to give his or her opinion, which shall be admitted in evidence, that the applicant for bail is likely to commit a serious offence if given bail. The applicant may be required to provide a statement in which he or she outlines the assets held inside and outside the State, his or her income and the source of that income, his or her previous criminal record, his or her previous bail applications and, if bail had been granted, the conditions that attached thereto. He or she can be cross examined on the statement, which will be sworn on affidavit, and it will be an offence to give wrong or misleading information. Appeals on bail applications in the District Court will in future be heard in the Circuit Court, thereby allowing appeals by way of a full rehearing of the case. Provision will be made for electronic monitoring of persons granted bail.

The new provisions are likely to result in the prosecution being able to mount a strong challenge to bail applications, with the result that there will be fewer applications or, where applications are made, they can be opposed more effectively. I hope these measures will be supported by all sides of the House. I intend to discuss these measures in detail with the Director of Public Prosecutions so that any deficiencies that exist with regard to the preparation of cases against the granting of bail can be fully addressed.

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

It is well and good that the Minister has rehearsed the reply he gave on Question No. 465 of 31 January, in which he stated, "It would not be appropriate for me to comment on the circumstances in which bail may have been granted or, indeed, refused in particular cases." However, on 14 December 2006, he stated:

Regarding Operation Oak, 24 associates of Mr. Martin Hyland have been arrested and 23 have been granted bail. I have stated on a number of occasions that I regard this as very deeply unsatisfactory and have been criticised for doing so because it has been seen as disparaging of the Judiciary ... It is not acceptable that 23 out of 24 serious drug criminals are at liberty after being granted bail ... gardaí testify in the cases and oppose bail, yet they constantly find people who have been charged with serious offences are granted bail. I strongly contend that the practice is wrong and must be addressed.

The Minister cannot have it both ways. He often opposes the leaking of information while leaking it himself. He cannot say it is wrong for him to comment on individual cases only to do so when it suits him. He told the House that the associates of Mr. Hyland, all of whom were identifiable, had been arrested, yet he cannot provide specific information when I asked him whether the Garda objected to bail in the cases to which he referred on 14 December 2006. Was he making it up?

The Minister repeatedly says he is not disparaging judges but that is not how the media and the public view the matter. In one example of many, The Irish Times of 16 December 2006 reported that the Minister "publicly rebuked judges over the high rates of bail being granted in the face of Garda opposition". He went on a crusade by citing particular evidence but now says he cannot give the evidence to substantiate his claims.

I agree that bail laws must be updated and, if judges are not implementing the law, we have the responsibility in this House to bring changes. However, while I welcome the promise to bring such changes, if we are going to be consistent and fair to every branch of this country's public administration, the Minister must substantiate the charges he makes.

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

It is interesting that Deputy Howlin is so selective in quoting the Dáil record because, if he turned back a few pages, he would note that he raised the matter for the first time in this House. He asked:

Does the Minister accept that his current policy has not worked and that the first step to a successful policy lies in recognising his failure to date? He stated yesterday and today that 24 members of Mr. Martin Hyland's gang are before the courts.

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

I am not denying what I said.

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

The Deputy should not get so excited. He continued: "Does [the Minister] accept that 23 are out on bail and walking the streets and what does he propose to do about this?"

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

I am happy to acknowledge I said that because it is the truth. I am asking the Minister to substantiate whether the Garda objected to bail and to indicate whether we need to change the law or the practices of the Garda. We have a duty to ensure that people who face serious charges and are recognised members of ruthless drugs gangs do not walk the streets. This is not a matter of idle semantics between two sides of the House but a question of ensuring that we do our collective duty by protecting the public from drug pushers.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hear, hear.