Seanad debates
Tuesday, 9 December 2003
Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) (Amendment) Bill 2003: Second Stage.
It is interesting that at present we are holding several hearings on the criminal justice system during which we have heard presentations from many sides of the argument on balancing the scales of justice. The Human Rights Commission enshrines the right to avoid self-incrimination which although not the same as the right to silence is often interpreted as such. The legislation does not permit a judge to draw any inference from a witness's decision to remain silent in a criminal trial except in the case of a terrorist offence. A person appearing before a tribunal does not enjoy that privilege. Several of those who have appeared before tribunals of inquiry have not only been charged but found guilty as a result of interim reports. Given the powers and public nature of tribunals where witnesses do not always have the mechanisms to bring forward a defence, it seems there is a gap between many of the findings in Mr. Justice Flood's interim report and its conclusion. While the evidential part of the report was based on logic there did not seem to be a definite link between the two parts. We need to ensure when we embark on these processes that there are safeguards to protect the good name of people who may be only marginally involved in some areas of the investigation.
No comments