Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael)

I move amendment No. 11:

In page 21, subsection (2)(a)(ii), line 2, to delete "ne bis in idem," and substitute the following:

"ne bis in idem1,".

1autrefois acquit, autrefois convict or double jeopardy.

The Minister is aware the term "ne bis in idem" is a Latin phrase meaning "not twice for the same". It describes the legal doctrine which comes to us from Roman civil law and prevents the trial of a person twice for the same offence. It is more commonly referred to as autrefois acquit and autrefois convict depending on the circumstances. Most laymen know it as double jeopardy. It is a legal principle which has been established in Irish law for a considerable time.

The first mention of it in statute was in section 14 of the Interpretation Act 1937. It has been referred to in case law since 1963, including in well-known cases such as Attorney General (O'Maonaigh) v. Fitzgerald which effectively established the doctrine of autrefois acquit at common law and the State (Attorney General) v. Judge Deale, which recognised autrefois convict. However, as far as I am aware, there is no mention of the doctrine of ne bis in idem in Irish statute law or case law. It comes to us from civil law but it appears in section 25 of the Bill.

I assume this is due to an effort to mimic the terms used in Articles 20 and 89 of the Rome Statute which is not unreasonable. However, I must ask whether it is wise that this term enters our Statute Book out of the blue without any definition of what it means or how it should be applied. In this respect, a simple footnote to the Bill offering alternative terms for what effectively is the same doctrine would help to place the term in common law perspective, particularly since the Bill will operate in a common law jurisdiction. Failing that, the Minister must make an amendment to define the term ne bis in idem in the Bill.