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

The fact that current law governing gaming is outdated and in need of reform if it is to reflect the realities of a modern gaming sector, including gaming over the internet, is one of the reasons why I initiated a review of gambling. That review is currently underway in my Department and addresses reform of the gaming and other sectors.

The objective of the wide-ranging review is to provide Government with options for a new and comprehensive legal and organisational framework governing the gambling architecture in the State. As I have already pointed out in this House, in reply to previous Questions, it is a matter of record that successive Governments have shied away from attempting any significant reform of our gambling laws since our existing gaming and lotteries legislation was enacted over 50 years ago. Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, I am resolved to make our gambling laws relevant to the 21st century. In light of this commitment, I feel we must take the time to make sure this is done effectively. We must first achieve a policy in relation to a new gambling architecture that is capable of winning broad spectrum agreement. It is when this goal is achieved that we will be in a position to address the matter of legislative change, with some degree of confidence.

Any such new policy aimed at modernising our gambling code must take account of the issues raised by new technologies, particularly the internet. In addition, policy must also be premised on the three important considerations which are the hallmark of most well-regulated gambling codes. These are:

that young people and the vulnerable are protected

that gambling should, in all respects, be fairly and openly conducted and

that gambling is kept free of crime.

While taxation is a matter for my colleague the Minister for Finance, it can be anticipated that as far as regulatory compliance is concerned there will be no question of disadvantaging domestic or Irish operators.

As the Deputy is no doubt aware, and as I have pointed out on previous occasions in this House, it is a matter for the Garda Síochána to investigate breaches of our current gaming legislation and to take whatever action is deemed appropriate. I have been assured that gaming premises receive Garda attention and if breaches of the legislation are detected appropriate action is taken. I invite the Deputy, if he has information about any specific breaches of the relevant provisions of the Acts, to bring this to the attention of the Gardaí. I can assure the Deputy, however, that should the law need to be changed to ensure an appropriate level of enforcement or control of gaming, I will not hesitate to do so as part of the outcome of the review of gambling currently underway. In that context, may I say that following the settling of policy, arrangements will be made in the normal course to address the necessary legislative change.

As the first comprehensive review of our gambling law, effectively since the enactment of the Gaming and Lotteries Act 1956, draws to a close, it is reasonable to expect that any new legislation that may arise, will be both complex and comprehensive.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 310: To ask the Minister for Justice and Law Reform further to Parliamentary Question No. 184 of 29 April 2010 in which he stated that it was not his Department's responsibility to legislate against forced marriage if he will reconsider his reply in view of reports of two Latvian women being trafficked into Ireland and falsely imprisoned for the purpose of forcing them into marriage; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39794/10]

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

I am of course aware of the case to which the Deputy refers. As he will understand, this matter is the subject of an ongoing Garda investigation and it would not be appropriate for me to comment on the specific aspects of the case or on any possible criminal charges that might arise. Also, as I outlined in my earlier reply, my Department does not have responsibility for marriage registration. That said however, I can outline the general position in the criminal law where a person is held against their will with a view of forcing them into marriage. There is not on the statute book a composite offence of holding someone against their will with a view to forcing them to marry. However a person who engages in this activity would be in breach of existing criminal laws in respect of its constituent elements.

False imprisonment, which essentially consists of restricting the personal liberty of another person, is an offence under section 15 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997 and carries a life sentence. Unlawfully intimidating a person with a view to compelling him or her to do something which he or she has a right not to do, e.g. attend a marriage ceremony, amounts to coercion, which is an offence under section 9 of the 1997 Act punishable by a fine and up to five years in prison.

The seriousness of the offence of false imprisonment is also marked by the additional provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2007. The 2007 Act allows for a person suspected of false imprisonment to be detained by Gardai for investigative purposes for up to seven days (subject to judicial authorisation). It also provides for the courts to make Monitoring Orders for persons convicted of false imprisonment. Courts may also make Protection Of Persons Orders prohibiting offenders from engaging in any behaviour that would cause the victim of the offence fear, distress, alarm or intimidation. The same Act provides mandatory minimum sentences for repeat offenders.

The whole area of marriages of convenience is a complex one and there are no easy solutions. It is a question of adopting a number of complementary strategies including international police co-operation. In addition to the criminal sanctions as outlined above, where coercion is found in time then the marriage can be prevented. If a marriage has taken place and is later found to have involved coercion then any immigration benefit can be withdrawn.