Vincent P Martin (Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister. It is much appreciated that the line Minister is present. She is busy with voting obligations in the Lower House, and it is the tradition in this House to facilitate her in any way we can, but it is good that she is present for such an important debate.

The Bill's purpose is to extend to victims of coercive control the same protection when attending court as applies under section 34 of the Domestic Violence Act 2018 to those attending court for breach of safety, barring and other orders. Currently, those attending court to give evidence as potential victims of coercive control are treated differently because the restrictions in respect of those who may be present in court rooms do not apply in proceedings concerning the defence of coercive control. Nor does the prohibition on broadcasting apply.

Coercive control is a persistent pattern of controlling, coercive and threatening behaviour. It includes all forms of domestic abuse - emotional, physical, financial and sexual - by a partner or ex-partner. It traps victims in relationships and makes it impossible or, at times, dangerous for them to leave. Under section 6(1) of the Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981, in prosecutions for rape and some other of the most serious sexual offences, the court must exclude the general public from the trial. There are qualifications to this as to the persons the court must allow to remain, such as participants in the proceedings and bona fide representatives of the press. This is similar to section 34 of the 2018 Act.

As legislators, we must be conscious of Article 34.1 of the Constitution, which provides that, save in special and limited cases as many be prescribed by law, justice shall be administered in public. However, I am fully satisfied that the legislative provision I propose will not be problematic in this regard. Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights also allows for varying degrees of privacy and anonymity in criminal proceedings in appropriate circumstances. Speaking in support of this legislative initiative, Ms Caroline Counihan, BL, legal support manager with Safe Ireland, stated that Safe Ireland welcomed this proposed new measure to exclude everyone from court during criminal proceedings for coercive control except those who were directly concerned with them.

The experience of coercive control is difficult to talk about for many survivors. We feel that if they knew that they would not have to face the additional challenge of talking about it in public, they would find it easier to come forward to make complaints of coercive control and, if the case was prosecuted, be incentivised to give evidence in court.

Writing in yesterday's The Irish Times, Mr. Fintan O'Toole expressed his view that the judicial system was repeatedly failing women attacked by men. He wrote:

We have ended up with a distorted system in which hundreds of people go to jail for non-violent offences and the non-payment of fines but violent and dangerous men go free. This is the precise opposite of what the public wants. When the administration of justice is so out of kilter with the values of the community, we can no longer suspend our disbelief.

This is the third Bill in this area I have introduced. Next week, I will introduce a further Bill titled the bail (amendment) Bill 2024, which will stipulate that perpetrators of coercive control should and must face the tougher bail regime already in existence. The Bill will propose a very straightforward amendment. I have two further Bills in this area at an advanced stage.

The problems are not of the Minister's making. I emphasise that and indeed recognise that she has been receptive to reform; however, more must be done. In the rough and tumble of politics we all get criticism and one criticism of the Minister that I have heard is that she is too big into reform. That is a very good quality. She is an open-minded, reforming Minister. I thank her for the constructive and positive way she received my Bill, the Domestic Violence (Amendment) Bill 2023, in which I proposed to extend to victims of coercive control similar protections regarding the right to cross-examination. It would not permit the accused to personally carry out the cross-examination of the victim in cases of coercive control. The Minister has since enacted that and I recognise that. She also went further and expanded that amendment to other categories.

In February, I proposed another Bill, the Domestic Violence (Amendment) Bill 2024, which would impose a tougher bail regime. It also proposed to increase the punishment sentence for breach of domestic violence in respect of protective court orders. The Minister broadly welcomed that Bill but in her contribution, she shared and flagged potential adverse consequences. She did not say that she was buying into them but she was sharing those consequences with legislators. In my opinion, those so-called unintended adverse consequences, while all stateable, were bordering on being legally Jesuitical. It was like a top-heavy academic response, no doubt on the advice of the Attorney General's office. I will quote a little of what the Minister said that day in the Seanad:

Making a breach of all domestic violence orders a possible serious offence means that it might become harder to successfully persuade a court to grant any of them. Respondents would be expected to contest the case in a more vigorous manner. In the interests of justice the court might, in certain circumstances, be less inclined to grant orders, in particular those ex-parteorders where only one person is present.

She continued:

Of course, the whole point of getting a domestic violence or barring order at weekends or quickly or perhaps with only the victim there is that it can be accessed as quickly as possible. By putting a higher bar here there is potential - I am not saying it would be the case - [but there is a potential] that it might not be granted because the person who is being accused should be given a right potentially to defend themselves in a way they would not at the moment.

I disagree with that theoretical proposition that the Minister shared with the House on that occasion. We have to accept that the current system is not working and that some victims are in grave danger. Constantly looking around the corner anticipating all of the theoretical pitfalls is laudable, and I appreciate the Minister must be very prudent in considering all options, but I am concerned that this will not move at a fast enough pace and that we will tie ourselves up in knots by looking at the theoretical possibilities.

"Some men see things as they are, and ask why. I dream things that never were and ask why not?" So said Robert Kennedy. Our State, to be true to the exhortation made yesterday by the Ceann Comhairle to Natasha O'Brien that we are on her side, must legislate to the maximum degree and without delay to defend and protect the victims of domestic and gender violence, to name but two of many categories. The lawyers and advisers may ask why and point to a theoretical myriad of difficulties but I would ask, to paraphrase Robert Kennedy again, why not? There is a legal way and we must find it as soon as possible.

Why do we not push out the boundaries of protection afforded to victims of domestic abuse? Why not challenge ourselves to be the leader in the world and to protect the vulnerable and victims of domestic abuse? Why not set us that challenge? Rather than follow, let us lead? Rather than wait around, let us do? Let us translate words into action? Why not be true to words and give real and concrete reality to our vision that women would be protected from violence and abuse in all areas of their lives, including in their homes? I accept that not all victims in these circumstances are women. We must accept that men are at the receiving end of this violence also.

I will hand over shortly to Senator O'Hara who will second the Second Reading proposal. I look forward to the contribution of the Minister and to sitting down with her to discuss the Bills I will also propose next week. Let us get things moving. I commend Members of this House who, in record numbers, signed one of my Bills. It is mine with a small "m" because it is a cross-party Bill. I believe in the force of a collective legislative assembly here in the Seanad. Together we are stronger. This unites everyone. Let us get on this together as one team. Let us stand up and protect the vulnerable who, for far too long, have not been protected adequately. This is not a criticism of this Minister, this Government or even the previous Government. This is a cultural and society aspect which we must rise and reflect in the Upper House. Let us not even wait on the Lower House, the Dáil. Let us lead the way with these amendments. I commend my Bill to the House and look forward to the other contributions.