Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Taoiseach if a programme of law reform has been agreed arising out of recommendations made by the Law Reform Commission as outlined in his Department's Strategy Statement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [49724/12]

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Law Reform Commission has initiated a comprehensive consultation process in order to develop proposals for its fourth programme of law reform. Following this consultation the commission intends to bring its proposals for the fourth programme to the Attorney General for her views early this year. I will then submit a draft programme to the Government for approval, as required by the Law Reform Commission Act 1975.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The statement of strategy for the Department of the Taoiseach commits it to drawing up a programme of law reform arising from the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission. How does the Department prioritise the legislation that is to be brought before the House? For example, the Personal Insolvency Bill 2012 took many months to prepare and bring before the House and it is only now coming to some form of realisation after almost two years of preparation. The Minister for Justice and Equality recently asked the commission to review the legislation covering bullying, including the Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997, in light of the need to legislate for cyberbullying and other issues that, unfortunately, are now frequently manifesting themselves. In devising this programme of law reform, will additional resources be allocated to the Minister for Justice and Equality or the Office of the Attorney General to ensure the fulfilment of the programme and drafting of legislation? Does the Government intend to review how judges are appointed in light of the commission's recommendation in that regard?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The consultation process for the fourth programme began in October 2012. The commission posted a general notice on its website and invited submissions for consideration from various groups. The president of the commission sent out letters in October to a wide range of public bodies and non-governmental organisations inviting submissions on the fourth programme and it also wrote to the Chairman of the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality in this regard. Since 2000 it has been the practice for the commission to discuss the programme for law reform with the joint committee. In November the commission placed an advertisement concerning the fourth programme in two journals that have a wide circulation among the legal profession, namely, the Law Society Gazette and the Bar Review.

The commission's annual conference for 2012, which was held on 11 December, focused on the development of the fourth programme. The conference was addressed by speakers from Ireland and abroad and covered a wide social and economic setting for the development of the new programme, as well as areas of law which the commission might consider to have included. The commission plans to hold further public seminars early this year, including a seminar in NUI Galway on 27 February.

The commission will also liaise with the consultative committee, and a note on that has been circulated. The consultative committee has been in place since 1998 to assist in the commission's consultation with the Attorney General under section 4 of the 1975 Act in the preparation of law reform programmes. The consultative committee includes representatives of the Office of the Attorney General, the Bar Council, Departments, the Law Reform Commission and the Law Society. The commission will liaise with the committee in parallel with that consultation process.

The commission has sufficient staff to meet its demands. Staff are assigned to each of the commission's three functions, namely, law reform, access to legislation and administration. The commission has reformed and restructured all of its processes to ensure each function has adequate staffing resources and that they are deployed to deliver the best results for citizens and the State. The staff allocated to the law reform function comprise the director of research and six legal researchers. These staff are currently completing the final elements of the commission's third programme of law reform, which should be concluded by the middle of this year. They are also beginning the initial scoping of the fourth programme.

Four staff are allocated to the access to legislation function and, following the restructuring of that area, they comprise the project manager, assistant project manager and two legal researchers. The access to legislation team produces and maintains the legislation directory for Acts and statutory instruments, responsibility for which was assigned to the commission by a Government decision in 2007. The registration directory for Acts is complete from 1922 to date and is kept current. In 2011 the commission commenced production on a legislation directory of statutory instruments, which is complete from 2000 to date. The commission is currently examining how it might extend the legislation directory to statutory instruments preceding 2000. This team also produces and maintains the classified list of Acts in force twice each year. The sixth revision was published on the commission's website in December 2012. In addition to this classified list of Acts, a classified list of statutory instruments in force has also been prepared and is being reviewed by Departments. Once that is published the list of statutory instruments will be kept up to date by the access to legislation team. It also produces and maintains a list of revised Acts, over 130 of which are on the website.

I am not aware of any intention to change the structure of appointments for members of the Judiciary. These applications are vetted by the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board under the chairmanship of the President of the High Court and presented to the Attorney General for consideration by the Minister for Justice and Equality.

Deputy Martin mentioned another issue which has momentarily slipped my mind. That process is underway and when the consultation has concluded the proposals will go to the Attorney General for Government approval of the programme.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My question pertained to resources for the Departments. One of the issues arising is that while many recommendations will come forward their implementation through legislation could take a long time unless additional resources are allocated to the relevant offices, particularly in the Department of Justice and Equality in respect of cyberbullying and the Office of the Attorney General.

The Taoiseach indicated that the manner in which judges are selected will not change. Is that over the lifetime of this Government? The Chief Justice and others have made compelling arguments for the need to review fundamentally the way in which we appoint judges to ensure transparency and reflect changing public perceptions. Since the general election we are supposed to be moving into a different era in terms of political and administrative reform. Such reform should cover the way in which we appoint judges to address any perceptions that would otherwise apply.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have been examining the way in which legislation is produced for the Oireachtas. For many years Governments have published lists of legislation which they hoped to publish during Oireachtas sessions. Over the last couple of years these lists have come under pressure from troika requirements because the country happens to be in a programme. This has put additional pressure both on the Departments preparing the legislation and on those in the Attorney General's office who have to put the legislation into shape in terms of drafting it. We need to investigate the way in which legislation is prepared, in terms of its remit and spectrum, as it goes through the circle of Departments.

Perhaps if there was consultation in the beginning with expert draftsmen in the Office of the Attorney General, legislation could take the short circuit before arriving there. The staff there are very experienced and could point out what needs to be done with regard to the issue rather than have people working very hard on areas that might not be a priority for the legislation envisaged. It might be better if we were to ask ourselves what legislation we want to have enacted before the end of the year, rather than stick to the old method which had a list of ten or 20 pieces of legislation and we were happy to get 18 or so of them published.

I agree that the process of how legislation is prepared needs to be examined. The Deputy is aware that once the heads of a Bill are approved, they go to the relevant Oireachtas committee for the views of the political process. This has been helpful. However, there is a bottleneck with legislation in that when it all comes in from the different Departments, it must go through the channel of the Office of the Attorney General. This puts enormous pressure on the people who must deal with this complex legislation. There may be a way of streamlining that process somewhat, but it may be necessary to look at the issue of the staff available here. The Deputy knows, it is not easy to get such staff as expert drafters require experience. I am interested in looking at the issue in that context.

A number of pieces of legislation are being prepared to deal with the courts, the Court Service and the Judiciary. The process by which members of the Judiciary are appointed may be due for focus under some of that legislation, but I cannot say it is because I have not seen the detail of what is proposed. However, I would be happy for that issue to come up later as part of the overall work of the Minister for Justice and Equality, which has an exceptional range, because of the need for legislation in that area. Legislation in this whole area is an issue we could discuss in the House with a view to achieving better results for the exceptional efforts made by personnel in Departments and in the Office of the Attorney General. Their work may be disjointed somewhat and if there was initial consultation between the experts, that might short-circuit quite a deal of the work. I intend to speak to the Attorney General about this.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to raise the issue of sentencing. The Taoiseach will know that the Law Reform Commission published a report on sentencing in early 2012 and that last week there was an extraordinary public reaction to a decision by a judge with regard to sentencing in the context of sexual offences. I commend that judge on the speed with which he rectified that decision. I particularly commend the victim, Fiona Doyle, on her great fortitude, courage, tenacity and honesty.

This case and others like it show up the inconsistency in sentencing. Will the new programme of law reform include measures, such as the introduction of sentencing guidelines, to ensure consistency? Could we have a sentencing guideline council to provide monitoring of this area or could we have a permanent court of appeal to deal with some of these matters? Will any of these issues be part of the law reform measures the Government is considering?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not my place to comment on any individual case that has been determined by a court. The clarification given by the judge involved in the case mentioned by the Deputy was very welcome. I had intended to meet the victim in the case, Mrs. Doyle. I have great admiration for her courage, which sends out the message that people who go through that horrific process should not be afraid to come forward and have their story told.

I do not know yet whether sentencing guidelines will be included as part of the process by the Law Reform Commission because the public consultation process is only under way. The president of the commission has put the details of the consultation process up on the website, has advertised in two of the legal journals and has written to many NGOs. I can confirm that the Minister for Justice and Equality has established a group to carry out a strategic review of penal policy, which will include the issue of sentencing policy. I expect that group will report later this year.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Taoiseach's announcement of a strategic review of penal policy and that this will include sentencing policy. I commend again the issue of the need for consistency so that justice is done and is seen to be done. I do not necessarily seek a response now, but I urge the Taoiseach to ensure that the suggestion for a sentencing guidelines council and a permanent court of appeal will be included in the considerations.

I do not expect the Taoiseach to comment on individual cases, but as the Taoiseach said in response to a question I asked previously on this issue, we need others who are victims of crime, particularly these heinous, hidden crimes of a sexual nature, to have the confidence to come forward. The Taoiseach made a good case in appealing to people not to be put off that. We need consistency in sentencing so people know that not only will they have their case heard, but they will get justice in order to build that type of confidence.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Not only must justice be done in these cases, but it must be seen to be done. We can reflect on the Deputy's suggestion for a sentencing council. Currently there is an appeal process from one court to the next. It is not a question of putting in place something that may cause even further backlogs in the judicial system. The growth of delays in the court process is part of what the Minister is attempting to deal with now and Members are very welcome to give their views on the range of legislation dealing with the courts, the courts system and the operation of the courts as it progresses. I will ask the Minister to reflect on the Deputy's suggestion for a sentencing council. Obviously, the strategic review group set up by the Minister will reflect on that also. The group expects to report later this year.