As I way saying, it is obvious that anyone closely associated with life in this city, as well as those acquainted with life in rural areas, will be aware of the way the present law is being totally manipulated by a few smart solicitors to get people off serious offences. People have been able to get away with the unauthorised taking of cars continually over the last five years in this city. It reached very high proportions and several thousands of cars were stolen. It has reached a ridiculous stage. The criminal now even helps the people whom he stole the cars from. He burns out the cars in my area so that the owners can get the insurance, thereby putting up general insurance premiums. The car parts are sold to back street garages, people who participate in the black economy. This Bill will at least give the Garda an opportunity to tackle offences of that kind. Up to the present the Garda have been made idiots of and anybody who tries to justify this does not understand the position.
I should like to say that when this Bill reaches its Fifth Stage — I cannot speak for the Fianna Fáil Party on this but I assume that when we discuss it at a party meeting this will be agreed — coincidental with it we will be discussing the Fifth Stage of legislation dealing with complaints procedure. It would be wrong to proceed otherwise. In the original document issued with the Bill it was implied that there might not be legislation in regard to complaints procedure. If so, I should be glad to hear from the Minister tomorrow, when he concludes this debate, what he proposes in this regard.
I would remind the House that we were told it had not been decided whether legislation would be necessary to establish complaints procedure or whether it would be introduced in the first instance as an administrative matter. However, we were promised that both Houses would be given an opportunity to discuss complaints procedure before it was brought into effect. I suggest that there must be legislation and that both Bills be decided together. We could not expect the House to agree to pass a Bill to amend the criminal law while the Minister could by regulation or by administrative act introduce complaints procedure. That would be impossible and I have been told so by solicitors I have spoken to.
I will put forward a few viewpoints on sections I regard as extremely dangerous. During an Adjournment Debate I gave statistics in regard to crime, vandalism and lawlessness in this city. On a number of occasions I have highlighted that. The Bill will help to solve many problems, but we must ensure that we will get a right balance so that we will not antagonise the community against the Garda by giving the latter tough powers. The Garda do an extremely good job in so far as they can. For years they have been crying out for legislation such as this. This Bill gives them almost all the powers they require but they should implement the Bill without using unnecessary force, when force is necessary. I disagree with some Deputies who think that the Garda can solve all problems without the use of force. That seems funny to me. I will leave it at that.
Deputies have spoken about the effects of section 3. I share the concern of the Garda and the framers of the Bill in regard to the questioning of those who commit serious crimes. The Garda have been complaining that their investigations are being hampered in some way. In many city centre areas there is extra pressure by the Garda and this alienates communities in those areas. The level of trust in the Garda is correspondingly low — it is just a "we and they" situation. Section 3 covers petty crime. Some people may think there is no such thing as petty crime. In deprived city centre areas it often becomes necessary for children to steal from shops. I do not consider that as a very serious crime, though I accept it is crime. They often do it for survival, through hunger or because they do not have money or because their parents do not look after them properly.
Section 3 covers a vast array of offences, including misdemeanours, shoplifting, petty larceny. If the Garda use heavy arm tactics against that kind of crime they will find it very difficult to get public support when they are dealing with more serious crimes. That has been proved in relation to the Offences Against The State Act because only one out of every ten people detained has been convicted afterwards. In those cases people were arrested on suspicion but in 90 per cent of the cases the authorities were wrong. Powers of detention in these circumstances were only given previously in the Offences Against The State Act and they should not be given for inner city type minor thefts. That is going a bit too far and the balance will have to be looked at. If that is not done, though the Garda try hard, there will be further alienation. They try hard to do their job but they do not have the support of the people. I am speaking with wide experience of those areas and with the support of the clergy, social workers and community people who work in those areas. I know the Minister has submissions on that. It would be unfortunate if the House ignored the expertise of the people who know those areas.
You cannot generalise on a Bill such as this. Protection has to be built into Bills. Many people do not realise how much suppressed anger and resentment exist in some of those deprived areas. It is another question whether it is justified.
A section like section 3 could possibly break the camel's back, and this section has to be looked at very carefully. At a time when resentment and frustration are increased by a massive increase in unemployment this type of position can lead to an explosion. There were a number of independent assessments following the Brixton and Toxteth riots in 1981. The major reason for those riots was the alienation of the young people in those areas from the police force. This can happen again without the police positively trying to aggravate the matter.
The Garda have so many problems in those areas and they are called out so frequently that there is a tendency to beat it out of them rather than bring them in and question them like they do in an upper class area. I suppose if I was a garda in some of those areas I would be inclined to do the same. A garda in those areas can hit a fellow a few wallops for a minor crime and it is taken far better by young people than being brought in and interrogated as can be done under section 3 for the same offence. Having spoken to many of those young people and their parents, I know they would accept a wallop far easier than they would accept being dragged down to Fitzgibbon Street, Mountjoy, Pearse Street or Store Street stations and interrogated.
I believe the section should be amended. One amendment which could be looked at is that the detaining garda should at least have reasonable grounds for suspecting that the person detained has committed the offence. The reasonable grounds and the crime suspected must be stated to the person being detained as well as to the station sergeant and not just to the gardaí. The suspect must have the right to appeal this to an independent tribunal, which I am sure would be allowed under separate legislation but is not under this Bill. The station sergeant would be held responsible in court for ensuring that the suspicions of the detaining garda are reasonably grounded and not just that he so thinks. He must explain himself. I support also the tape recording of interviews.
Sections 15 to 18 are the other sections there has been a lot of discussion about. I understand the position of the gardaí and the position of the drug squad who pick somebody up, find a substantial sum of money on that person and cannot force that person to reveal where that money was obtained. Legal experts have pointed out that the sections are extremely vague and undefined. I am not a legal expert, but if they are vague and undefined they have to be very well teased out. This party have at present under examination the type of amendments we will put forward to sections 15 to 18, which are basically about the right to silence. Any person can be stopped, searched and required to account for anything in his possession. The Garda in some areas have a hunch that a certain person may be involved in crime or helping to organise crime, but they may be wrong, so we have to be very careful on harassment. I believe the Garda have sufficient powers to do most of the other things they want without harassment.
I am concerned mostly with my constituency where a lot of the people have not reached a sufficient level of education, tend to be backward and are ignorant of rights and wrongs. At the same time there are others who are very well briefed. A frightened, confused person who may have some psychological problems could be convicted on very weak circumstantial evidence because his confusion or disorientation may result in making statements or failure to make statements which are construed as corroborating some kind of evidence. That is easy to understand in an area like Sherriff Street where there is a high level of crime. If young people from that area are dragged in and questioned some of them would almost agree with anything. Others would not agree even if they were in the High Court. People have a right to be protected. I am afraid sections 15 to 18 will be taking away a lot of rights which I believe people are entitled to have.
I believe that weak, vulnerable people could easily be dealt with unjustly by the law. When you go into court and you have sharp solicitors and station sergeants there it is very difficult if a person is not properly defended. Such a person can easily be convicted of crime while others can get off because they have a good solicitor. It is the job of the legal system to prove people guilty, given reasonable legislation to do that. I believe if sections 15 to 18 are very severely amended they will not take anything away from the Bill. Perhaps it might be important to leave the sections in for more serious crime because we are then up against the people who are very well briefed. We are up against the criminal element who have legal advice before they go into crime. We are talking about the major gangs and the major criminal activity in this city. It would be terrible, having waited so long for a Criminal Justice Bill, if we ruined it by not creating the distinction between petty crime and minor larcenies and serious crimes like drug trafficking and major criminal gangs. I believe a few amendments could clearly show the distinctions here. I do not believe it would be very hard for any efficient draftsman with a good legal mind to come up with good amendments to sections 15 to 18 in order to do that.
It has been said by some people who defend sections 15 to 18 that all it means is that in court the judge and jury are notified that a certain person left out something important in the initial stages of making a statement. However, if it is a person's first time in a Garda station or if a person did nothing and was just hauled down to a station and faced with a few bulky looking customers asking him to make a statement, it can be very intimidating. They do not give tea in Garda stations, as anyone who ever tried to bail somebody out or help somebody knows well. If one is used to being in a Garda station one can handle the situation. There have been some cases — I will not name them as they will be known to the Minister and his Department — where it has been alleged that prewritten confessions were found in Garda stations. Whether that can be substantiated or not is another matter, but even the thought that that could happen is enough to make people concerned. If a person is nervous he may leave something out or he may accept something if he thinks it will make it easier for him. That may be used against him afterwards. Some people say it will not be used against him, but perhaps it would. If I was walking down the street, bundled into a black maria and ten minutes later was answering to a burly sergeant I would forget a lot of things. I would even forget I was here today. I do not go along with the fact that that can be used in court against a person. I realise that this has to be thrashed out further. The criminal will still have his alibi because he will have thought out what he will say before he is brought in.
I have said time and again that we must give a fairly tough Bill to the Garda to enable them to deal with the problem of law and order. They must be allowed to use a certain amount of force and flexibility. At the same time we must protect the rights of the individual. They are fundamental and human rights which could be taken away if this Bill went through unamended. This party supports the Second Stage but the Minister can rest assured that it will be an active and lively Committee Stage. What eventually goes through the House is extremely important. I congratulate the Minister for eventually bringing the Bill into the House. I plead with him to think of all sections of the community before it is passed.
In spite of what was said by the last speaker community policing will be a major step forward in solving the problems in deprived areas where crime and vandalism are rampant. The Garda are not popular in many areas. Perhaps it is not their fault but it is in many areas where they were highly respected in times gone by. If there is blame on one side there is also blame on the other. There are many people willing to co-operate with the Garda and to build up the kind of relationship that once existed. The Garda would know what was happening and get a better feedback, particularly in city areas. The Garda have said that it may be easy enough in rural or suburban areas to have community policing but it would not be so in city areas. If the Garda co-operate with community policing they will stop many of the tactics going on at present. I will not refer to them but in my area and in others it is well known that the drug problem and drug pushers are on the decline not through any actions of the Garda. That is regrettable. I predicted that a long time ago and was scourged for it, but if we do not have community policing and co-operation with the Garda they can be given ten Criminal Justice Bills and things will deteriorate. If the Minister or the Commissioner think otherwise, they should think again.