Lynn Ruane (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister. In the codes of practice there is a process whereby somebody will have to be answerable as to when a camera is turned on or off and there will be disciplinary procedures. When I consider this I must weigh up turning on or off a camera merely being a disciplinary procedure against an individual who may be impacted and their case, their life or their trial. I understand something may come upon somebody very quickly and there may be a very legitimate reason as to why a camera might not be on. Senator Keogan's amendment which was ruled out of order would have meant the cameras were always turned on. There would then not be an issue of somebody deciding to turn on a camera. This would come with its own complications regarding privacy.

There are other ways in which to address this. I fully accept that there may be disciplinary procedures but I cannot get away from the cost there may be through not having impartial video footage. Somebody could end up in court for a particular reason or somebody could end up with a certain sentence that could have been very different had there been impartial evidence. The fact that a Garda goes through a disciplinary procedure does not protect the civilian who may be tasked with trying to prove something outside the realm of what has been captured in footage. I can accept that the procedures will allow for gardaí to be answerable. I still do not feel that on balance it protects the civilians whose lives could be altered forever by a camera being turned on or off at a particular time.

I have experienced aggravation from gardaí throughout my life. It has got better, or perhaps I do not experience it as much. I do not know whether young people in my community would say that the aggravation has improved. When I was younger I watched gardaí rile up situations and enhance violence and bring it on by how they treated people for no reason. If a camera is only turned on to pick up the response to this and somebody responding to a difficult situation with a garda, then we will only ever see one side of it. That individual's life could be impacted forever. Nobody may want to believe that some preceding event happened that could give context to what then took place. This creates and maintains a negative relationship between many people and the Garda. We want to move away from this. We want people to feel safer in their interactions. For this to happen there has to be balance in how they are protected. I can accept there may be disciplinary procedures but I cannot accept the potential for someone's life to be altered, or for them to receive a custodial sentence or conviction, because there is not full or partial evidence of an event that happened.

With regard to Coco's Law and section 62, is the Minister saying that under section 62 there will be an offence if a Garda shares information? I want to look beyond what falls under Coco's Law or even the situation with Dara. I have worked in addiction for 20 years. I have seen not gardaí but people in general share the most heartbreaking videos of people who are clearly very vulnerable under the influence on the Luas and buses. It may happen to people with special needs. I have supported people who have been filmed during psychotic episodes when they may have been eating their own faeces. These are the images that people share. So much can be happen to someone who is vulnerable with regard to mental health that may never expose an area of their body to fall under Coco's Law but videos being shared could change their lives forever with regard to their recovery. I do not feel as though this has been captured. Even though they are not intimate images under the definition of Coco's Law they are life-changing images of vulnerable people. Whether we like it or not people share things in groups all the time. They find it funny and they laugh with their friends. It is forwarded on. It does not matter whether people are gardaí, politicians or students in school. People do it. I am not saying that it will be specific to gardaí. For some reason people are amused by other people's hardships and miseries. This is across the board.

My friend Paul Griffin lost his sister on the M50. She was decapitated. We saw how quickly images of her lifeless body were sent. They were sent to groups in which he was a member. People did not know it was his sister. People share images without thinking. Gardaí will be no different from any other human being who shares images thinking no end user will be impacted by receiving it. The legislation would be extremely strengthened by including amendments that could protect the most vulnerable people with an explicit regulation that creates an offence of putting any vulnerable person in danger by sharing images of them.