Eugene Regan (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister. I also welcome the fact this Bill is initiated here and is being introduced in this House.

In June 2008, Fine Gael published its Victims Rights Bill to give the victims of crime comprehensive statutory rights for the first time under Irish law. The Minister at that time attacked Deputies Shatter and Charles Flanagan, the co-authors of that Bill, and surreptitiously announced his own Bill on victims' rights, which had not been drafted then and no heads of such a Bill were available at that stage. One year later, this Bill, albeit different from the more comprehensive Bill put forward by Fine Gael which the Minister for his own reasons did not adopt, which primarily deals with victims' rights is being introduced. We welcome the general tenor of it and the initiative to put the rights of victims more to the forefront in criminal proceedings.

The other aspect of the Bill concerning double jeopardy, which deals with potentially such issues as intimidation, errors in trial and new evidence emerging, which could not have been available at the time, is also very important to ensure that we have the necessary armoury in place to tackle crime. However, the legislation raises serious issues in regard to that principle which has a constitutional base and a basis in common law.

The issue of victims' rights and reform of the law that is being introduced here in regard to victim impact evidence, in particular to extend to family members of victims of crime the entitlement to make an oral statement, or a victim impact statement, at a sentencing hearing is to be welcomed.

The issue of double jeopardy is an important one to which I will refer later. In addition, the provision for the Director of Public Prosecutions to have a right of appeal to the Supreme Court on a with prejudice basis against an acquittal, where the acquittal arises from an erroneous ruling by the trial judge on a point of law, is something that can be supported. The right of appeal by the DPP against a decision by the Court of Criminal Appeal not to order a retrial following the quashing of a conviction is another important element. There are various miscellaneous amendments to which the Minister referred. It is important to note that many of the elements of the Bill were considered by the criminal law review group and many of the recommendations of that group are reflected in the Bill.

In general, Fine Gael supports this Bill, which reflects to some extent our initiative in putting forward a Bill on victims' rights last year. It goes some way towards giving greater recognition to the victims of crime rather than the perpetrators and, for the first time in Irish law, it gives a voice to victims of crime to allow them the recognition they deserve. As well as these general comments I reserve the position of tabling amendments on Committee Stage as there are quite a number of important and fundamental procedural changes in the substantive criminal law which will require further scrutiny.

The Minister has in this Bill put forward a series of changes to the double jeopardy law which put on a statutory footing the possibility of retrying criminal cases on the basis of new evidence. Given the constitutional basis of the double jeopardy rule and the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which form part of the Lisbon treaty, it is important that we get this right. There are serious issues here for our system of justice and if we overstep the mark in this area it could prove embarrassing. The double jeopardy rule has a constitutional basis as well as a common law basis. However, it is desirable that a person who has escaped justice due to the impossibility of obtaining evidence at a particular time as a result of witness intimidation is held to account. Thus, there is an inherent logic in changing the rigid adherence to this rule and, in that regard, one would support the initiative to place on a statutory basis restrictions on the rigid application of that rule. However, it is important that we comply with the fundamental principles and jurisprudence to which we have signed up in the European Convention on Human Rights. The jurisprudence in this regard has been developed and I presume the Minister has taken the best legal advice from the Attorney General on this matter. We will need to return to this on Committee Stage.

Section 19 of the Bill is concerned with the admissibility of evidence. Although in many ways I welcome this, it appears we are providing greater flexibility with regard to admissibility and that evidence obtained with some technical error in procedure by the Garda Síochána will not be deemed automatically precluded as evidence in a trial. I welcome this change, which is similar to those contained in a Bill I introduced to this House but which was flatly rejected by the Minister. However, this idea is reflected in section 19 of the Bill and in another Bill which the Minister recently initiated. I am pleased that some of the ideas coming from this side of the House, while not acknowledged, are being adopted by the Minister.

I welcome the fact that the Minister has introduced the Bill in this House. It will receive close scrutiny on Committee Stage and we will bring forward some amendments in terms of the technical detail. The Bill is a very technical one, but its general purpose and objective will be supported on this side of the House.