Results 1,001-1,020 of 11,441 for speaker:Ivana Bacik

Seanad: Order of Business (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I ask the Leader for a debate on domestic violence in light of the fact that we are nearly at the end of Women's Aid's 16 Days Campaign to highlight the need to eliminate violence against women. We need a debate in this House on the way in which legislation, in particular, could be amended to ensure greater protection for victims of domestic violence and to ensure also greater applicability...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 2: In page 6, line 36, after "person," to insert the following: "or any offence under the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997". We had a full debate on the amendment on Committee Stage. The Minister might recall - certainly my notes indicate - that he accepted in principle the merit of the amendment, which proposes to extend the type of offence to which the...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I am grateful to the Minister for indicating his acceptance of the principle of the amendment and also for his indication that he will introduce an amendment in similar terms in the other House. However, I am disappointed that he could not have had the amendment ready for Report Stage in this House, given that it has been fully debated in this House. I also believe that my amendment has the...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I am grateful to the Minister for accepting the principle of amendment No. 4 on Committee Stage and tabling his own amendment. On Committee Stage I raised the issue of the time gap between the injury caused and the death of the victim and that the family would be able to speak about the impact on the relative before his or her death. It may only arise in a small number of cases but it is an...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 5: In page 8, between lines 26 and 27, to insert the following: "(4) Where a person in respect of whom an offence has been committed, or a family member of that person, proposes to give evidence under subsection (3) orally rather than in writing, it shall not be necessary for the court to give any particular direction or warning to that person in respect of his or her...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: This amendment would not rule out a discretionary warning by a judge. It is an indication that it is not necessary for a court to give a warning. It is inappropriate that there should be any sense that victims' families would be singled out in this way.

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 7: In page 10, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following: "(7) This section is without prejudice to the power of a court to receive evidence regarding the effect of an offence, other than an offence to which this section applies, on the person in respect of whom the offence was committed.". This amendment seeks to make clear that a court has a general power to...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 8: In page 10, line 48, after "competent" to insert "and suitably trained". This amendment seeks to add an extra layer of qualification to the intermediary provided for in section 6 which inserts a new section 5A into the 1993 Act which allows questions be put to a child or person with a mental disorder through an intermediary who in a court's opinion is competent to act...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister for his reply. There is anecdotal evidence of some issues in the past but, clearly, this is not a matter on which there is hard and fast evidence. It is important that the court would have some guidance on what constitutes competence, and yet I have not been specific in the amendment in such a way that would tie the hands of the court either. The wording is appropriate.

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 9: In page 10, after line 48, to insert the following: 7.—In an application under this section the court may make such order as it sees fit to facilitate legal representation of a person in respect of whom an offence has been committed or a family member as appropriate, where it is appropriate to do so.". This amendment proposes to give power to the court to make an...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 10: In page 11, line 11, to delete "Court of Criminal Appeal" and substitute "Supreme Court". We had a full debate on the merits of the Court of Criminal Appeal versus the Supreme Court. I will not go back over it except to state that my party followed the recommendations of the balance in the criminal law expert review group, which had recommended the Supreme Court be...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 11: In page 11, line 26, after "concerned" to insert the following: ", for example DNA evidence or an admission by the person concerned". This is the first amendment dealing with Part 3, which in some ways makes the most significant departure from current criminal procedure, which creates the new exceptions to the rule against double jeopardy. I stated already on...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: As I said, I am not wedded to the precise wording proposed, the wording used by the criminal law review group, but I accept that it was not drafting legislation. It gave these two examples of the specific evidence that might constitute new and compelling evidence. As the Minister acknowledged, it is likely that evidence on the basis of which acquittals will be reopened will include DNA...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 12: In page 12, line 38, after "Court" to insert the following: "if satisfied that the Director has given the person concerned all reasonable notice to facilitate his or her appearance and". I tabled two of these three amendments on Committee Stage and the Minister pointed out that I had omitted one related amendment. Therefore I tabled a third, but they are all,...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister for his reply. I should have said the amendments relate to sections 8 and 9, applications for retrial and, section 23 which deals with prejudice prosecution appeals. I take the Minister's point that where a person who is aware the order has been made purposely absents himself or herself the subsection will allow the court to proceed to hear and determine the application...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I spoke already on Committee Stage to the effect that I did not agree with Senator Regan on this matter. I have listened to his persuasive arguments in favour of his amendment but I stand by what I said earlier. This is such a radical departure from the current long-standing rules of criminal law and the principle against double jeopardy I do not believe it would not be appropriate to make...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 14: In page 13, line 38, after "Court" to insert the following: "if satisfied that the Director has given the person concerned all reasonable notice to facilitate his or her appearance and".

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 15: In page 18, lines 8 and 9, to delete ", the Attorney General or the Director". The wording to this amendment is different from the one I tabled on Committee Stage on section 14, an appeal on a point of law to the Supreme Court. On Committee Stage, I agreed the amendment could be better drafted. I have since redrafted it to encompass what was raised during those...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister for giving it his considered attention. As he stated, it is a lop-sided provision, especially if the DPP himself is appealing. Although section 10 provides for the court to make the retrial order, I suppose the DPP could appeal. In that situation, it seems even more unbalanced that he would be the one then certifying that the determination involves a point of law of...

Seanad: Criminal Procedure Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (8 Dec 2009)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 16: In page 19, line 35, after "section" to insert the following: ", and only where the Director of Public Prosecutions is contemplating the making of an application for a re-trial order under section 8 or section 9 of this Act.". This arises out of Committee proceedings which did not include this amendment. In the debate on section 16, however, I stated that I would...