Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 9 Jun 1993

Vol. 432 No. 1

Adjournment Debate. - Change in Procedure for Charging Suspects.

Proinsias De Rossa

There has been a fundamental change in the way the Garda are required to deal with offenders which I believe is seriously obstructing them in the battle against crime. Until recently the position was that when the Garda arrested a person suspected of being involved in a criminal offence, he was charged by the garda involved, appeared in court either that day or the following day and was either remanded in custody in the case of more serious offences or released on bail, as a court considered appropriate. A circular has been issued by a Deputy Commissioner of the Force to the effect that as a general rule charges should not be preferred until an investigation has been completed and that suspected offenders should be released without charge or without being granted bail and be summoned to appear in court at a later date.

I understand that the circular issued by the Deputy Commissioner was based on advice offered by the Director of Public Prosecutions. The new procedure has caused concern to members of the Garda Síochána who believe that it effectively ties their hands at a time when the public demand is for stronger action to combat crime. It has also angered members of the public who feel that the interests of offenders have been put before those of the victims of crime. While the offender may be virtually caught in the act, the completion of an investigation may take some time, witnesses have to be interviewed, fingerprints taken and other forensic evidence prepared. Offenders now caught in the act are released without charge pending the completion of the ensuing investigation.

I understand that after a recent armed robbery in a bank in Dublin three men were arrested. During the course of questioning they are understood to have admitted their involvement in a series of other raids, including one in which an innocent bystander was wounded. They were released within hours pending the completion of the investigation, the submission of a file to the DPP and the decision as to whether there was sufficient evidence to bring charges. In another incident in Dublin a garda was stabbed with a syringe. Although the alleged assailant was arrested and taken to the local Garda station he was released pending the preparation of a file for the DPP.

There is a delicate balance to be struck between the right of a suspected offender to be presumed innocent until such time as proven guilty by a court and the need to give the Garda adequate powers to protect society from criminal activities. The new directive tilts the balance unreasonably in favour of the criminals. I have always supported the principle that persons charged with offences should have reasonable access to bail, particularly as it can take so long for a case to come to trial. When bail is sought a charged person has to put up his own bail in minor cases or, more usually, find someone to put up independent bail. The bail set can be substantial and there is, therefore, a financial incentive for the person who goes bail to ensure that the charged person turns up for trial. What is likely to happen now? A suspected offender who is released and who knows he or she is guilty is not likely to wait for the decision of the DPP. He or she is likely to go to a new address or to leave the country. Everyone agrees that crime is one of the most serious problems facing modern society and that there is an unacceptable level in Dublin.

Within the past few weeks we have had a series of highly publicised attacks on tourists which, apart from the injury, loss and distress caused to the victims, has the potential to do serious damage to our tourist industry. What will be the reaction of a tourist who is attacked and robbed, who learns that the Garda have arrested a suspect but that he has been released without bail or charge pending a decision by the DPP? Should we be surprised if the tourist never returns? This is not an acceptable situation, it gives the wrong message to criminals and to victims of crime that our society takes a less serious view of crime than it should. The Minister for Justice must now intervene to sort out the situation and to revert to the old system where suspects were charged as soon as possible. If legislation is required to achieve this then I urge the Minister to provide it as a matter of urgency.

Minister for Justice (Mrs. Geoghegan-Quinn)

Tá mé buíoch den Teachta De Rossa as ucht an cheist seo a ordú agus tá mé buíoch díot féin, a Cheann Comhairle, as ucht deis a thabhairt dom an cheist a fhreagairt.

I should make it clear that the instructions issued to members of the Garda Síochána in November 1992 followed an advice received by the Commissioner from the Director of Public Prosecutions. The DPP was concerned to ensure that charges would not be preferred in a case until the relevant investigation had been completed, and to avoid problems which can arise if charges are preferred prematurely. These include the following matters: A premature charge could result in an injustice to the accused if fresh evidence, hitherto unchecked, comes to light which cast doubts on the guilt of the accused or perhaps shows him or her to be innocent. The preferring of a charge effectively puts the accused out of reach of further investigation and questioning, therefore reducing the chances of procuring further evidence. The DPP also clarified the circumstances where the directions of his office should be sought before a charge is brought.

The Director of Public Prosecutions is by statute responsible for the prosecution of criminal offences and prosecutions are initiated by the Garda Síochána acting on his advice. As the Director of Public Prosecutions is independent in the exercise of his functions, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on any advice given by him in relation to the initiation of prosecutions.

The implementation of the November 1992 instruction based on the DPP's advice, inevitably means that charges will not be preferred immediately in more cases than heretofore, but will await completion of a Garda investigation, and directions from the DPP's Office as necessary. These cases will proceed at that stage and the accused persons will be brought before the court, whether by summons or by the charge procedure — it will not necessarily be by summons — and then processed in accordance with the law.

Apart from these instructions there are standing instructions from the Garda management dating from August 1989 concerning the day to day procedures to be adopted in the Dublin metropolitan area relating to the processing of summary offences, and minor indictable offences, which would not normally require directions from the DPP. The instruction is that such offences should be brought before the court by summons rather than by a charge procedure, except in cases where the defendant's name and address are not known, cannot be ascertained, or there are good grounds for believing that the person arrested would not appear on summons.

These arrangements have been in operation since 1989 but I understand that there has been increasing use of the summons procedure in connection with minor offences in recent months.

There are significant benefits for policing arising from the policies being pursued by the Garda Commissioner in relation to these matters and I want to refute the argument which has been made in the media, that the purpose of the changes is to reduce costs. The present policies have the effect of reducing the time spent by gardaí in multiple court appearances to deal with remands, and makes more gardaí available on the street, where they are most needed. Public policing is thereby enhanced.

It should also reduce pressure on the courts and allow both the prosecution and defence time to prepare for the hearing of cases before the courts. It should be possible, where a summons procedure has been used as an alternative to a charge, to process most cases at the first hearing.

It has been represented in the media that the effect of the policy changes has been to allow offenders to be released back on the streets to commit further offences with impunity, and that this would not happen if they were charged and brought before a court. This is based on a misconception of how the judicial system works in practice. It is very rarely, if ever, that where a person is charged and brought before the District Court that the case is disposed of at the first appearance. Invariably the accused is remanded for eight days and released on bail. Further remands are usual until the prosecution is ready to proceed with the case. So, in effect, the end result of using the summons procedure or the charge procedure is the same — the release of the accused person. He is not taken out of circulation.

The Commissioner is satisfied that the present policies being pursued in relation to the procedures for bringing alleged offenders before the courts, are the best one from the point of view of policing. They are releasing more Garda resources on the streets. He believes that the success of these policies will be reflected in an improved service to the public. There are indications that there was a reduction of 3 per cent in the overall crime rate in the first four months of this year.