Eugene Regan (Fine Gael)

That is how I read the new section 71B(4)(a)(ii), which section 7 inserts into the 2006 Act. The Bills digest provided by the Oireachtas Library - which I find extremely helpful in dealing with matters of this nature - states:

While the section does not address the question of an individual's guilt or innocence it does allow the Member to infer from the previous convictions of individuals that an organised criminal gang exists. It is the finding of the existence of this gang that is a condition precedent to the ultimate finding of guilt or innocence. Therefore, allowing evidence of previous bad character of alleged gang members to be used by the Member to form an opinion as to the existence of a criminal gang marks a departure from the common law's traditional reticence to allow this evidence to be give cognisance at trial.

While this is not per se a criticism of the Bill, it provides that a garda infers from previous behaviour, convictions etc. that there is a criminal organisation. The Minister spoke about the knowledge of a garda on the beat in Dundalk, compared to that of a chief superintendent in Drogheda. However, it is not knowledge per se that is the criterion contained in the Bill, but expertise, which means "experience, specialised knowledge or qualifications". As they are the criteria in the Bill itself, the Minister's argument is contradictory. In saying this, I do not criticise the Bill but merely suggest this amendment is appropriate to ensure the necessary safeguards against abuse in the unlikely event that it should happen. However, past experience suggests such things do happen.

The Minister does not intend to accept either this amendment or any other tonight. However, the Minister could introduce it as a guideline within the Garda Síochána on the implementation of this Bill. It would be an important safeguard to ensure that chief superintendents play the role of assessing and pooling all of the information and exercise their judgment based on their expertise, namely, their knowledge, experience and qualifications. That is a role for a chief superintendent and the Bill would be all the more powerful, were decisions to be made on that basis. They would be less likely to be challenged and I make the point that all Members support this legislation and want to make it work. As for former members of the Garda Síochána, I have read that since chief superintendents are forcibly retired at the age of 60, at least one has indicated that he certainly would not make himself available to provide evidence. I presume this is not the reason the Bill simply refers to "former member of the Garda Síochána" as distinct from the rank. It is important to have this safeguard in place. The Minister mentioned internment. Executive internment was introduced in Northern Ireland and I would not like this measure to be branded as judicial internment. Safeguards are required and this legislation must work, which is the reason I have tabled this amendment.