Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

46. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality whether the Government's failure to introduce minimum sentencing for CSAM offences is connected in any way to concerns about prison overcrowding and capacity; whether he accepts the Tánaiste's statement that prison capacity must never be a factor in sentencing decisions; whether he agrees with the Tánaiste's statement that there are "too many examples of people who are given relatively short sentences" for heinous crimes; and the steps he is taking to ensure that resource constraints within the prison system do not result in lighter sentences for those convicted of serious child sexual abuse offences. [20210/26]

Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

66. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality if he has examined the sentencing frameworks for CSAM offences in comparable jurisdictions, such as Britain, or other EU member states; and whether Ireland's current legislative approach falls below international best practice. [20211/26]

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 46 and 66 together.

At the outset it is important to state that, under the Constitution, the determination of sentence in an individual case is a matter for the independent judiciary. Judges must consider the specific circumstances of each case and impose a sentence that is proportionate to both the seriousness of the offence and the individual circumstances of the offender, taking into account any aggravating or mitigating factors.

Therefore, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on sentencing outcomes. The independence of the judiciary is a fundamental principle of our justice system and is essential to maintaining fairness and public confidence.

The Government recognises the profound and lasting harm caused by offences involving Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM). The circulation, possession and distribution of such material represents a continuation of the original abuse of a child and can have profound and lasting impact on victims. This is a central consideration in the Governments approach to combatting these offences.

There are a range of offences under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 to address all forms of such abuse. The act provides for severe penalties including, for the most serious offences, a maximum penalty of up to life imprisonment.

The Government’s position on mandatory minimum sentencing for offences relating to CSAM is not connected to concerns about prison capacity. Sentencing policy must be guided by constitutional principles, including proportionality and the independence of the judiciary, rather than operational matters such as prison accommodation.

The Programme for Government included a commitment to review Ireland’s existing penalties available for sentences related to child sexual abuse offences. A Review of Child Sexual Exploitation and Child Sexual Abuse Penalties has been undertaken internally within my Department, following the implementation of the 2011 EU Child Sexual Abuse Directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.

Among EU Member States and England and Wales, Ireland’s penalties - across the 20 offences - are on average higher than the vast majority of other countries.

This review indicates that Ireland’s penalties to address child sexual abuse offences are among the most punitive in Europe, and far exceed the maximum sentence requirements set out in the 2011 CSA Directive.

The recast of the 2011 CSA Directive is currently being negotiated and the indications are that Ireland’s current legislation will continue to exceed any revised maximum sentences proposed by the EU.

I can assure the Deputy that the legislative framework will continue to be kept under review to ensure that the criminal law remains robust and proportionate in addressing these serious offences.