Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I commend the former Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Fitzgerald, on putting forward what is overall very progressive legislation and legislation which moves us forward. The amendment we were debating when we adjourned was one which is essential if we are to ensure the Bill goes far enough to make a significant difference. I acknowledge the former Minister indicated that with regard to amendment No. 1, the Department is looking at putting forward definitions. I am happy to work with the Department to see what proposals it makes and to engage with it constructively between now and Report Stage.

Amendment No. 52 is very crucial. It establishes very clearly an offence of controlling and coercive behaviour. The arguments we have heard against the introduction of this very necessary offence have been inadequate. Senators have talked about the complexity but all law comes with complexities. They go against the advice we have had from all of the NGOs working in this area.

I will mention a case that has emerged since we debated amendment No. 52 of the very tragic deaths in the UK of a man who killed his wife and daughter. His two sons have given extensive testimony, which is important to listen to, about the experience of domestic violence. It chimes with all of the case studies, evidence and experience our NGOs in Ireland have told us about. They talked again and again about the word "controlling" and said their father was a controlling, vitriolic bully. They talked about the homicides that took place as a result of decades of abusive and controlling behaviour. They talked about these not being a single event but the culmination of a lifetime of struggle.

It seems from the evidence it was a premeditated crime that took place after his wife and daughter had looked to establish themselves separately in a separate home. The reason this is important is there is a real concern that our legislation as it stands is not adequate. It is not adequate to talk about assault when we do not talk about the patterns of behaviour surrounding it. We cannot talk about individual events and it is not adequate to talk about harassment.

If we look at the transcripts of cases, when people go into court and are asked about assault and harassment, they are asked why they responded to texts or why they returned to the house. None of that recognises the reality of coercion and control and of the manipulation and threatening environment that is created by coercion and control. It is a difficult area to step into but it is a much more difficult area predominantly for the women but also for children and men who live in such environments. It behoves us as a State to engage with this.

There is a move to look at controlling and coercive behaviour a little more in terms of issuing protection and barring orders. A breach of order may be one way in which we can ensure a criminal consequence. This neglects the key fact that it is at the point when people take a step out of an environment of control and coercion to try to reach for help that they often become particularly vulnerable and may be most vulnerable to an escalation in danger and violence. If there are situations where people have evidence and feel they can come forward with a crime of controlling and coercive behaviour, we should allow them to do it and ensure they have double and appropriate protection of a criminal prosecution and that a criminal prosecution can be brought in that area. It is also important to state that controlling and coercive behaviour is not necessarily a compound and complex issue. It can be prosecuted alongside a situation of assault. It in no way prevents conviction for assault or harassment, for example. It simply provides another thread or strand and is something that moves beyond those individual instances to a pattern of behaviour. We have more esteemed legal experts such as Senator Bacik in the House. She has spoken about how in England and Wales we are seeing successful prosecutions under the provisions of sections 76 and 77 of the Serious Crime Act in respect of controlling and coercive behaviour. We are seeing an increase in the number of prosecutions because the courts are learning how to prosecute it. The signal that we send in respect of controlling and coercive behaviour being regarded as a crime by this State and not a matter of civil dispute is essential. There have been very few successful prosecutions in Ireland of marital rape, but the signal that was sent, which was that it was not okay or a matter of personal disagreement, argument or complexity and that there are behaviours which we as a State regard as unacceptable and criminal, was important. That signal is also important here.

I urge the Minister of State to engage with us and to accept this amendment. I recognise that the Department may wish to make changes to the amendment on Report Stage. Having, I hope, successfully passed this amendment on Committee Stage, I would be happy to work with the Department on the nuance or detail of any aspect of the amendment, as I am sure would those in my group and many others in the House. However, I consider it a fundamental, crucial and red line issue if this Bill is to do what we want it to do.