Seanad debates

Wednesday, 7 March 2007

Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) (Amendment) Bill 2007: Committee and Remaining Stages

 

1:00 pm

Photo of Michael McDowellMichael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

I thank the House for the spirit in which it took today's debate. I also thank all parties in both Houses in their approach to this issue. No party or Member is more or less concerned than any other on protecting our children. This is not a perfect set of circumstances and I wish I did not have to come before the Houses to introduce this legislation. However, I believe we have done some useful work.

I thank my officials for whom the past 108 hours have been a nightmare and for their hard work. I thank the Parliamentary Counsel and the Attorney General for their assistance.

All laws must be interpreted in a manner which is consistent with the Constitution. The Constitution empowers and directs the Judiciary to interpret our law in accordance with the rules of common sense. There is no mandate in the Constitution for trying people against common sense. There is no mandate in the Constitution for putting people on trial for events which are manifestly devoid of criminal content. A constitutional construction must always be put on legislation. I am in no doubt the DPP and the courts will never interpret this legislation in a way that flew in the face of common sense or would be unfair to ordinary individuals. This is about protecting children from sexual exploitation. I have no doubt that the Long Title, the Constitution and common sense will direct the prosecuting authorities and the Judiciary to interpret this legislation in a manner which is consistent with the Constitution and not in a manner which would be an abuse of our Constitution.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.