Gay Mitchell
Question:3 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Taoiseach the plans, that exist to amend the legislation establishing the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Director of Public Prosecutions Legislation.
I have no plans to amend that legislation.
Is the Taoiseach aware that, unlike the British parliamentary system on which ours is modelled, we have not the equivalent of a Lord Chancellor to answer for the courts here? Therefore, the administration of our courts has fallen badly behind. Would he agree that, worse than that, the Attorney General does not have to be a Member of Parliament and that therefore his Office is not accountable to Parliament and that, as a hive-off from his Office, the director of Public Prosecutions, in turn, is not accountable to Parliament? Would he agree with me that it is wholly undesirable that any officer of the State should be so independent as to be unaccountable for his actions, because there will always be circumstances in which accountability should prevail? Would the Taoiseach say whether he would re-examine this matter?
The Prosecution of Offences Act provided that the Director of Public Prosecutions should be independent in the performance of his functions in order to guard against undue or inappropriate pressures being brought to bear in particular cases. I do not see that independence would be maintained under a system where his decisions were subject to review or justification. It would also seem difficult to justify treating cases, where the Director of Public Prosecutions had decided to bring a prosecution, differently from cases in respect of which he had decided not to do so. Therefore, if we believe in the independence of the Office — the primary objective in establishing that Office under the Act to which I referred — interference with that independence would mean that we would fare worse than is the case at present.
Mr. G. Mitchell rose.
I want to call Deputy O'Donnell, who has been offering, and I will call Deputy Gay Mitchell again.
A Cheann Comhairle, no wonder Members who want to ask questions do not table them. We have to sit here while people who do not table questions are called in a piggyback fashion.
It is a matter for the Chair, Deputy, to decide whom he shall call in this regard.
Yes, but we have over 50 Members here who go to the trouble of tabling questions while people who do not table questions are called before us.
Please, Deputy Mitchell. I will not take any dictation from you. Deputy O'Donnell indicated earlier and I am calling her now with apologies to nobody.
We are sitting here, a Cheann Comhairle, while members of small parties are called before us without having tabled questions.
A Cheann Comhairle, mine is a brief question in relation to the Director of Public Prosecutions. To which Minister should a Member address a question in relation to the Director of Public Prosecutions? I had tabled a priority question to the Minister for Justice for tomorrow in relation to how victim impact evidence is compiled by the prosecution. That question was ruled out of order on the basis that the Minister for Justice had no influence over the Director of Public Prosecutions. Can I be advised how a Member can table a question about the role of the Director of Public Prosecutions, or which Minister is responsible? For example, could I ask a question of the Attorney General?
The Attorney General does not answer questions in the House. Deputy Gay Mitchell tabled a question to me to which I responded. If the Deputy wants to question the independence of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, I should say that that is not provided for under the relevant legislation. Either we believe in the independence of the Director of Public Prosecutions or we do not. Certainly, the Government does believe in his independence and has no plans to change his independence.
Is the Taoiseach aware that there is a difference between accountability and independence? For example, is he aware that it was reported in a newspaper recently that a case involving the theft of £750,000 of tobacco did not proceed because the book of evidence was not brought before the court? In addition, is he aware that on a previous occasion a case involving a murder verdict which was reduced to manslaughter did not proceed because the Director of Public Prosecutions failed to bring the book of evidence before the court on a number of occasions?
Let us be careful now not to reflect on the integrity or character of a person outside this House.
A Cheann Comhairle, I am asking a fair question. Please do not reflect on my integrity when I ask a question. You owe me an apology, a Cheann Comhairle. I was asking a perfectly proper question, as the main Opposition spokesperson on Justice. I will not have my integrity reflected on in that fashion.
I also have an obligation to protect the character and integrity of persons outside this House. There was no implication on your character, Deputy. Please proceed.
I was not going to impugn anybody, a Cheann Comhairle.
There was no implication on your character, Deputy. Please proceed.
Thank you. Is the Taoiseach aware of general public concern in circumstances of the kind to which I have referred, or indeed circumstances in which multiple deaths take place on our roads, when people can be killed on their way home from a disco in the middle of the night, when somebody can drive away from the scene of an accident without any prosecution taking place and no explanation given? In such circumstances would the Taoiseach not agree that some formula should be devised of accountability to Parliament, whether it be by way of audience for the Attorney General in the Seanad, or in whatever other way is appropriate, but that nobody should be so independent that they are not accountable to Parliament? It is outrageous that an action involving the theft of £750,000 worth of tobacco or the loss of life should fail because the book of evidence is not ready. This issue has been a matter of concern to myself and someone sitting not far from the Taoiseach for over a decade. I do not want to interfere with the independence of the Office——
Brevity, Deputy, please.
——but where the public interest requires it some form of accountability should be found. Finally, may I ask the Taoiseach whether he consulted with the Attorney General, as he said he would, since I last asked this question?
Yes, I consulted with the Attorney General and I have no plans to change the legislation in place. Neither have I any intention of commenting one way or the other on newspaper reports in relation to how the Director of Public Prosecutions carried out his functions.
I must now move on to Priority Questions. I do not have any discretion in the matter. I am moving on to Question No. 5 in the name of Deputy Allen.
May I ask the Taoiseach if he would look into this matter?
May I ask that my question, which has not been reached, be deferred to next Wednesday?
Very good, Deputy.