Seanad debates

Wednesday, 13 February 2019

Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) (Amendment) Bill 2018: Second Stage

 

10:30 am

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Exactly. I am not challenging the Minister of State's credibility. I just think it is an unusual situation. Senator Conway spoke about equality across the board. I completely agree with this. I have just one question for the Minister of State and his advisers. Some years ago, legislation was introduced which effectively said that a sexually inexperienced 14 year old boy who was seduced by a 17 year old sexually experienced girl was automatically guilty of rape. In other words, the person who was seduced was held to be guilty of rape. I protested against this and I was just wondering if it is still in force. It certainly flies against the face of equality. It is absolute madness. I said it at the time and got into a lot of trouble over it.

I welcome some aspects of the Bill. However, I am a little concerned about section 3, which reads:

The Act of 1908 is amended by the substitution of the following section for section 2:“2. Any female person of or above the age of 17 years, who with consent permits her grandfather, father, brother or son to have carnal knowledge of her (knowing him to be her grandfather, father, brother or son, as the case may be), shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years.”.

This calls into question the whole idea of consent. To what degree can a girl of 17 or over be held to have consent in the normal circumstance, where it is placed into the context of the family? I think there are very few young females who voluntarily engage in sexual activity with the grandfather, father or brother. It is usually after an intensive process of grooming. I do not know of any cases in which the female in the family could be held to be guilty of sexual aggression against the grandfather or of initiating sexual contact. If that happens, it is very rare. I wonder about convicting and sentencing somebody to up to ten years' imprisonment in a situation where they have been carefully groomed by the father, grandfather or brother and then engage in these sexual acts. I am a little bit concerned about that.

I was also a little bit surprised that there was no mention of section 5, which is very important and very welcome. It deals among other things with pornography, the exploitation of children for the purposes of child trafficking or child pornography, participation of children in pornographic performances and so on. This is a very important aspect of the Bill and is certainly welcome.

I am, of course, very much in favour of protecting victims of sexual violence. I just wonder about the aspect of grooming in terms of section 3. I am also curious to know the situation in respect of a sexually inexperienced 14 year old boy being seduced by a sexually experienced 17 year old girl and still automatically being convicted of rape. If that provision is still in place, it is something the Government needs to look at. Senator Conway talked about equality across the board. That is certainly not equality. It is a violation of common sense.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.