Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I am glad to have an opportunity to say a few words which I suspect will be relatively uninformed where this legislation is concerned. It is an important proposal being brought forward by the Minister and from what I have heard from previous speakers, there is a general welcome in the House for it. I am at one with the previous speaker, Senator Quinn, in welcoming the proposal while appreciating that we must tread carefully and examine the Bill's detail fully. In that regard, Committee Stage will be of much more interest to us.

The primary duty of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, or the government of any state, is to protect and defend the state and its citizens. In that regard, this legislation is a step in the right direction as it will give a further possibility of justice to those who feel they have been denied it.

The part of the legislation which interests me most is the proposed modification of the rule against double jeopardy. It would be inappropriate to quote particular cases in this House but very many of us know of cases where acquittals did not seem to be the fair or just decision of a court. Up to now, once a decision was made in that regard, it was final. In a number of relatively high profile cases over recent years, including murder cases, the acquittal of the accused left a deep sense of injustice in the community and the family of victims. In this regard, the possibility of new evidence and a new scenario emerging where a retrial could happen is very welcome.

People contacted me about this legislation whose loved ones were victims, with one being a murder victim. Such people are concerned and disappointed that the legislation apparently is not retrospective. Will the Minister of State clarify that? From when will this legislation, if approved, apply? Could it apply to cases which have taken place and where family members feel justice has not been done? I look forward to the Minister of State's initial reply to that and a further teasing out of that aspect on Committee Stage.

We all appreciate that the criminal justice law in this country is based on fairness and the absolute need for the State to have the necessary evidence to convict the guilty. That is correct and must always be the case. We are also aware of cases where for various reasons, such as the non-presentation of evidence or the intimidation of witnesses etc., a fair and just result to a trial does not seem to occur.

This legislation, if it would allow reflection and the re-entry of particular prosecutions, should not be feared. We should never fear justice or the opportunity to allow the vindication of people's right to a fair trial, and we should not fear the possibility of ensuring guilty people who have walked free are brought back into court and have the charges put against them again. In that regard, the issue of double jeopardy has been a major bone of contention and I welcome that it is to be addressed. I look forward on Committee Stage to ascertaining when the possibility of retrials in this regard will commence and if there will be retrospective application to cases which have received adjudication.

I also note the proposed changes on victim impact statements. There have been a few controversial cases involving victim impact evidence and we must be very cognisant of the rights of victims and their need, where they so feel, to have their feelings made known in court. For many, although not all, it can be a way to deal with suffering, bereavement and anger if they can state their feelings in front of the court. Any expansion of that particular entitlement should be welcomed.

I will leave my remarks at that as the Minister of State would recognise that I come to this legislation with no legal expertise whatever. I am purely reflecting what constituents are saying to me, especially constituents who feel the acquittal of the person charged with the murder of their sister was incorrect and wish the case to be reopened.