Jillian van Turnhout (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I was a little confused about the placing of amendment No. 18. I contacted the Bill's Office to try to clarify the issue and will speak to the amendment as it is now. We are all agreed that detention should be a last resort for children and those involved in the juvenile justice system, including legislators, State agencies and members of the Judiciary, cannot lose sight of this fundamental principle. I support amendment No. 18 for that reason and look forward to the Minister's response to it. The amendment put forward by Sinn Féin more closely reflects the spirit and the wording of section 96(3) of the Children Act and of Article 42A in our Constitution, as approved by the Supreme Court and the internationally and domestically accepted principle of detention as a measure of last resort for children. Would Sinn Féin be willing to change the word "imprisonment" to "detention" and resubmit the amendment on Report Stage? I do not like the use of the word "imprisonment" in the context of children.

On amendment No. 23, given the onus on the court to consider all non-custodial sanctions first and to impose a period of detention only as a measure of last resort, I agree that the court should have to account for its decision and its rationale in writing. Recommendation No. 33 of the strategic review group on penal policy of September last suggested that in all cases where a custodial sentence is imposed by a court, the court should set out its reasons in writing for doing so. The group further recommends that this requirement be incorporated in statute, which is what amendment No. 23 seeks to do. If this amendment is not accepted by the Minister today, I will revert with an amendment on Report Stage that will provide that the court should explain the reasons for its decision in open court in language that is appropriate to the child's age and level of understanding, which I believe is in keeping with the language referring to the remanding of children to detention in section 88(3) of the Children Act and with recognised principles of child-friendly justice such as the guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on child-friendly justice from 2010. I am very supportive of the principle behind the amendment but perhaps the wording could be re-examined.