Barry Ward (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I support the motion. The Minister has set out a very clear basis for continuing the Special Criminal Court. At the same time, I do not want to suggest that I think the Special Criminal Court is a good thing. It is a blunt instrument that tramples on the right to trial by jury. I was delighted to hear the Minister say she supports the notion that we should have jury trials to the greatest extent possible. However, the reality is that the Special Criminal Court is a necessary evil. It is something that must be there because of the existence of certain types of criminals in the system and certain types of trials that must take place.

There are those who oppose the Special Criminal Court - a non-jury court - and seek to have it abolished. Many of the groups that oppose it do so legitimately on human rights grounds and I accept their bona fides. There are other groups that challenge it on political grounds and out of self-interest. These groups are associated on one level or another with people who are coming before the court and want it removed for that reason. I do not accept their bona fides. This is a real problem when it comes to the debate on this court. While we can acknowledge that there are problems, we must acknowledge the necessity of this court and the necessary fact that it is there to deal with particular types of criminal, particularly in the areas mentioned by the Minister such as terrorism and organised crime, because we know certain groups that come before the courts have the capacity to interfere with the justice system, juries etc. The Special Criminal Court is the State's response to that kind of criminal, accused person and crime.

As I said, I am not 100% comfortable with the Special Criminal Court. It is a blunt instrument. Nearly a year ago, I suggested in this House that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, should not be the body deciding who gets prosecuted in the Special Criminal Court when we are not involved in one of the prescribed offences under Act. I listened to what the Minister had to say on this. The DPP is part of the prosecution and, therefore, is not a disinterested party in any criminal trial. I look forward to the report of the Peart commission and what Mr. Justice Peart and his commission will have to say about this issue and the Special Criminal Court as a whole because they can deal substantially with the issues raised by people opposed to the court, both those who do so legitimately and those who do so out of self-interest.

As for the motion, it is very important that we look at the report laid before the House by the Minister, the basis for her suggestion that this continue and why this motion should be supported. The Special Criminal Court exists for a reason. It is not something that is done on a whim. It is not something the State has put in place for fun. It is there for a very clear and distinct reason. It is necessary to tackle exactly the kinds of crimes and criminals outlined by the Minister. The reality is that people are still committing these crimes at a very high level, are intimidating juries and have done so in the past. Consequently, it is entirely appropriate that until the Minister, An Garda Síochána or another arm of the State can show us that this is not happening and that there is no longer a threat of jury intimidation or of attempts to otherwise pervert the course of justice from people who come before the courts, the continuation of the Special Criminal Court will remain a necessity whether we like it or not.

There are groups like the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, with which I have discussed this issue, that raise legitimate issues about this court. They raise questions that I hope will be answered by the Peart commission. However, we should never approach this motion without an eye on those who do it for self interest - those parties that are really doing it because of the people with whom they are associated who are coming before the court and not for legitimate human rights or constitutional reasons and issues relating to the rule of law but quite the opposite. They seek to pervert the course of justice. The very people who are coming before this court come before it because there is a demonstrable concern that they are going to interfere with and pervert the course of a legitimate criminal trial. That is the eye through which we must regard this motion. In considering how to vote on this motion, we must consider whether the court and its continuation are necessary. On the basis of what the Minister has said, the report that has been laid before the Oireachtas, including the views of An Garda Síochána and the DPP, it is clear to me and to the Fine Gael party that its continuation is necessary until such time as we can say otherwise.