Tom Sheahan (Kerry South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 305: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the double jeopardy in relation to murder and the retrospective trial of those acquitted of murder on the finding of new evidence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22918/10]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The effect of the rule against double jeopardy is that a person cannot be prosecuted for an offence where he or she has already been acquitted or convicted of the offence in question. In the Criminal Procedure Bill 2009, which has been passed by the Seanad and is now awaiting Committee Stage in Dáil Éireann, I am seeking to modify the rule in two respects by providing that:

1. where new and compelling evidence emerges after a person's acquittal; or

2. where an acquittal is tainted, for example because of perjury by a witness,

the Director of Public Prosecution may apply to the Court of Criminal Appeal for an order quashing the acquittal and ordering a re-trial. The "new and compelling evidence" procedure applies to a list of scheduled offences including murder, while the 'tainted acquittal' procedure may apply in any case tried on indictment.

These provisions will apply only to acquittals arrived at after the commencement of the new legislation. I am advised that to provide otherwise would constitute an interference by the Oireachtas in the administration of justice. It would, in other words, be a breach of the constitutional position on the separation of powers. The Deputy will find a comprehensive exposition on the Bill as well as on the issues surrounding the modifications to the rule that I am proposing in the statement I made to the House when I introduced the Second Stage debate on 11 February 2010.