Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I also welcome the Minister to the House and I welcome the opportunity to debate this important Bill on Committee Stage. I know it has been over 16 months since the Bill was before us on Second Stage and on that occasion I welcomed it as a long overdue Bill and a very welcome Bill. In the context of this first group of amendments, I would also like to welcome the principle which they are based upon and which they are ushering in. I note that Sinn Féin has withdrawn its amendments and Senator Ó Donnghaile has explained why. I support the Government amendments and it is very welcome to see the detail concerning the operation of a sentencing information and guidelines committee. This is long overdue and anyone involved in researching sentencing or in practice in the criminal courts is well aware of the many calls that have been made for the introduction of such guidelines. This is what Tom O'Malley has referred to as a structured discretion system, rather than the current system which is so reliant on an "instinctive synthesis" in sentencing as the Law Reform Commission has said and which, therefore, on occasion has resulted in inconsistencies in sentencing practice and a lack of predictability, which is a problem for those working in the criminal justice system, for those before the criminal justice system and of course for victims as well. I very much welcome the introduction of these amendments and of this principle of sentencing guidelines.

I absolutely agree with Senator Ruane on mandatory sentencing. It has been unfortunate that we have seen presumptive minimum sentences introduced in the past in respect of some serious offences. Now that we are introducing a proper system of sentencing guidelines, there is an even stronger argument for the rejection of mandatory sentencing and for a move towards this structured discretion model that we see incorporated in other jurisdictions and that we will see in this jurisdiction too. I very much welcome these amendments and I am glad we will not have the debate about some of them now that some have been withdrawn and the Government scheme of amendments appears well crafted.

On a related matter, where we do need to see further amendments, which I hope to introduce on Report Stage and I give the Minister notice of this now, is to tighten up or provide more detail on the role of judges in giving guidelines and effectively drawing up model charges to juries. I raise this now because we have seen controversy recently about a lack of judicial control in prejudicial comment made to the jury. I am specifically talking about comments made about a victim's clothing in the context of a sex offence trial. More generally, it would be useful for us to amend section 17 of the Bill, which currently provides for a judicial studies committee. I know that amendment No. 15 is included but I would like to put in an amendment on Report Stage, and I ask the Minister to reflect on same, to enable the Judiciary to have information and materials distributed among it for its use and for the performance of its functions, including in respect of judges conducting criminal trials with a jury to give guidance on: trial management; jury management; directing the jury and; such other matters as may assist in the fair disposition of a case in the opinion of the committee. It is about empowering the committee to provide for more detailed guidelines to judges along the lines of model charges to juries. That might be a helpful additional function for the committee. We might reflect on how that could be done.

I certainly hope to bring forward an amendment on Report Stage to that extent. I know the judges have bench books in the Four Courts, which are centrally important to the conduct of trials, but of course they are private and unregulated documents and now that we are moving in this very welcome fashion towards a more structured system for sentencing, it would also be useful to move towards a more structured system for the giving of charges to juries in criminal trials. We have seen so many appeals also, where critique has been made of particular charges to juries. It is a very difficult task to give accurate, fair and impartial charges to juries in any criminal trial and we all appreciate that, but some sort of structuring of that would be useful and section 17 is probably the appropriate place to see some sort of additional power inserted to do same.

I welcome these amendments again and I look forward to the progress of this Bill being more speedy than it has been to date so that it will come into effect and provide for this important change to our law.