Ivana Bacik (Independent)

I know "abscond" is not a legal term but the use of the word implies that the person would leave with the charge hanging over them in some way. This clearly deals with somebody who has been acquitted. There is no time limit on section 8 so when the section commences, somebody could be acquitted and five years down the line the DPP might move an application under the section because new evidence only arises at that point. If that is the case, it may be impossible to track down the person concerned to give notice.

There may be examples of a person deliberately not appearing because an application has been made but there may also be applications made under section 8(6) where it is not possible to locate the person. To say that this is because a person has absconded is immediately to suggest the person is guilty. We must be careful of the issue and that is the reason we have proposed the amendment. I will withdraw it now but we will press it on Report Stage.

I will propose an amendment for section 9(7) on Report Stage and I am grateful to the Minister for pointing out that oversight. Such an amendment should also have been included with the amendment to section 23.