Joanna Tuffy (Labour)

However, I have not signed a statutory declaration in many months. I am winding down my work as a solicitor at present but I could benefit from this legislation in the future.

I still have a problem with this section. The Minister has referred to the 1938 Act which provides for different people to take these types of declarations. However, I do not think that the Act envisages that the people taking such statements would be directly involved in the particular case. The member of the Garda Síochána is involved and is probably the person to whom the statement was made. He or she is also trying to solve the crime and will be giving evidence in court. Therefore, he or she has an interest in the statement being made. That raises the issue of a conflict of interest and places a question mark over the statement. While the issue of ethics arises, the main question is whether the statement is worth the paper it is written on. It places a question mark over the statement and the person concerned can argue against it. Given that judges are former solicitors or barristers, I believe they will find it difficult to accept these declarations.

The legislation provides that a person may give a declaration but it does not specify at whose behest. It is obvious that a garda would be looking for a statutory declaration to be made to back up a statement that has been given to him or her. We are all aware that problems can arise in such circumstances. While that is not true in the majority of cases, there have been problems regarding statements in the past. Statements given by witnesses can be problematic. I read the Dáil debate on this legislation and Deputy Costello gave the example of the Kerry babies case, where a sister of Joanne Hayes made a statement about events which was not true. It can happen that people who are witnesses, even if they are not the accused, can give statements that turn out to be untrue. Obviously, for people who are vulnerable, dealing with gardaí is very stressful. One must always examine a statement on its own merits.

In terms of the statement and given what the Minister said about section 21 of the 1984 Act, what is provided for there is not covered under the Statutory Declarations Act 1938. It is not a statutory declaration, an oath or an affirmation, rather a person is simply given a certain degree of extra protection through the making of a statement. The Minister could have made provision for such a measure in this legislation.

The Minister appears to suggest that the fact that a person would have to make a statutory declaration would make him or her more fearful of giving an incorrect statement in the first place, but the statutory declaration is given after the event. The person concerned makes a statement and it should stand on its own merits or otherwise.

As to the provision for the making of a statutory declaration to shore up a statement, the process must be done in an independent way. That is not what the Minister is providing for in this section. He could have broadened the measure by providing for the involvement of one of a list of people such as a priest or a teacher. Such a person would be in a position to make the individual concerned understand that the declaration is a serious matter, the signing of which involves a formality. However, I am not sure the person concerned will take the matter seriously if the garda who took his or her statement then takes his or her statutory declaration, as if the person concerned is somehow removed from it. I do not believe such a declaration would stand up or be worth the paper it is written on. I do not accept what the Minister has said on this amendment.