Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Cathaoirleach. As Members will be aware, the Minister for Justice and Equality is detained elsewhere this evening.

Amendments Nos. 1, 2, 16 and 18 address an oversight in the Bill. The Bill provides, in the definition of effective date of conviction, that where a community service order is revoked under section 11 of the Criminal Justice (Community Service) Act 1983, the effective date of conviction is the date of revocation. However, while in most cases revocation will be followed by the imposition of the original sanction, for example, imprisonment, section 11 of the Act also provides that the offender may apply to the court for revocation and an order may be revoked and not replaced by another sanction. The Bill, as published, does not provide for this scenario and that is the gap that amendments Nos. 1, 2, 16 and 18 address.

Amendment No. 1 provides a definition of "community service order" given that the term is used a number of times in the Bill. Amendment No. 2 effectively removes the reference to community service orders in defining the "effective date of conviction". Amendment No. 16 amends the definition of "relevant custodial sentence" to cover explicitly the situation where a community service order is revoked and replaced by a custodial sentence. This is being done by the addition of a new paragraph (f). Amendment No. 18 amends the definition of "relevant non-custodial sentence" to cover the two scenarios where a community service order may be revoked and still qualify as a non-custodial sentence: where it is revoked and not replaced with anything or where it is revoked and replaced by a non-custodial sanction. Amendment No. 14 is a drafting amendment to take account of the insertion of paragraph (f) in the definition of "relevant custodial sentence".