Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

Under Part 3, the Minister may make regulations providing for coroners' rules. It struck me that should be mandatory rather than discretionary and, presumably, it will happen. Part 4 deals with reporting of deaths to the coroner and the various categories of deaths. I see the logic behind that in regard to suicide, suspected suicide and suspected assisted suicide. However, where death occurs from natural causes, which are obvious to everybody, there is no need for an inquest. Why is there such a requirement where it is patently obvious a suicide has occurred? I am prompting a little discussion on that because it is often a very sensitive issue for families. What is the logic behind that requirement?

In regard to unnatural stillbirths and intra-uterine deaths, I notice there is no reference to an aborted foetus, for example. The Constitution provides for the equal right to life. Should that matter be addressed in the Bill? It is an issue of which politicians tend to steer clear because it is controversial and fraught with many legal complications and issues.

I fully understand why if a person is under Garda Síochána, military or prison custody at the time of death or immediately before his or her death, it must be reported. That leads me to an issue which arose last week which is not entirely related but, nonetheless, connected where there was an intervention by the Garda Ombudsman into an inquest. Such interventions should be addressed given that the function of the Garda Ombudsman is now being rolled out. We must have regard for people who might be under the microscope as the Garda was in this case. Where a complaint is made, there should be some discretion. There should also be some time lines in respect of an intervention. I appreciate that in this case the Garda Ombudsman is a new functionary within the system. No time lines are mentioned in the Bill in regard to the holding of inquests.

For time to time, there have been complaints by families about delays encountered in establishing inquests. At a time of great trauma for families, that seems unfair and unjust. Perhaps that will be improved now that we are moving to a full-time situation but there should be an obligation to operate within certain time lines. I appreciate the difficulty in that the complexity of an investigation will have a bearing on when an inquest is held. However, the Bill should provide that inquests are held as soon as possible. That would conform with the broad thrust of the European Convention on Human Rights to which the Minister referred.

Part 7 relates to the conduct of the inquest and the mandatory notice of 14 days. Section 47 states: "A coroner shall, whether by post or such other means as he or she considers suitable, arrange for the notification of any or all of the following persons". Does that mean there is an obligation to inform the family? Another section provides that where an investigation is undertaken, there are mandatory obligations on the coroner. However, section 47 states a coroner is required to notify "any or all of the following persons". If he or she notifies one or two of the three mentioned, that meets the requirement.

In one of the inquiries held by an Oireachtas sub-committee — I am not sure if it was the inquiry into the murder of Seamus Ludlow — there were strong complaints by the family in regard to the conduct of the inquest. The family was only notified on the morning of the inquest that it was taking place. We were all ad idem that should not be the case. I presume it has been corrected in the Bill but if it has not been, perhaps the Minister might respond.

I referred to the adjournment of cases. A broad spectrum of bodies can seek an adjournment. People representing the Coroners Society of Ireland have expressed some concerns in this regard. The spectrum is much broader than heretofore. This should be considered because intervention such as that of last week should not be used as a last-minute response to a complaint.

One point made by the Coroners' Society of Ireland concerns the powers of the chief coroner. The society is concerned about the extent to which these might impinge on the independence of individual coroners. It is imperative that whatever procedures are in place do not allow this to happen. Ultimately, this is under the control of the Department. Any development that impinges on the control of a coroner would be unwelcome and any mushrooming of agencies that could impede the speed of coroners' inquests should be avoided.

A point was made on the over-centralisation of death investigations and the Coroners' Society of Ireland seems to be under the impression that the service would be centralised in Navan. The office will be in Navan but it would be a little incongruous if all death investigations were conducted therefrom. Local investigations could be more expeditious and effective.

I am aware this Bill was published last April and that, as a consequence of the election, there has not been much time for full consultation. The Bill has not been discussed by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. There should be an opportunity for committees and the Coroners' Society of Ireland to engage with the Minister to ensure the changes he rightly says are long overdue are made in a cohesive way that ensures significant improvement to existing services.