Joanna Tuffy (Labour)

I move amendment No. 4a:

In page 4, line 20, after "passing" to insert ", unless the High Court on the application of the sentenced person concerned determines that it would be unjust for this Act to apply to that person".

Amendment No. 4a refers to a slightly different issue in that it deals with whether one can apply this legislation retrospectively. I do not believe the Minister has dealt with this issue in any of the Government amendments and I would like to hear his response. Will he reconsider not applying this legislation retrospectively in the way it proposes? The wording, as it stands, is that this Act applies in relation to sentences, whether imposed before or after its passing. Is it necessary or fair to include such wording? We are looking for an amendment which would at least allow the High Court to decide that it would be unjust to apply the Act retrospectively. I do not know if there is an alternative way to deal with it and perhaps the Minister might comment on whether there is such a way.

Government amendments Nos. 26 to 28, inclusive, deal, in part, with the issue we raised in amendment No. 27a. I thank the Minister and his Department for taking on board the issue we raised on Committee Stage. The amendments deal with the issue surrounding the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 but do not deal with the issue of a person's constitutional rights and whether the High Court could take those rights into account. Perhaps the Minister might comment on whether that is protected by the legislation.