Written Answers Nos. 126-133
126. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the extent to which witness intimidation continues to be monitored; the number of recorded incidents in each of the past ten years and to date in 2013; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28468/13]
View answer135. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the extent to which juror intimidation continues to come to the attention of the Garda authorities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28525/13]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 126 and 135 together.
The intimidation of a witness or juror is an offence pursuant to Section 41 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999, which specifies the offence as harming, threatening or menacing or in any other way intimidating or putting in fear another person who is assisting in the investigation of an offence by the Garda Síochána, with the intention of causing the investigation or course of justice to be obstructed, perverted or interfered with. Following the enactment of the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009, the offence is now punishable on indictment by a fine or a term of imprisonment of up to 15 years.
Since 1997 the Garda Síochána has operated a Witness Security Programme in response to attempts by criminal and other groups to prevent the normal functioning of the criminal justice system, including threats of violence and systematic witness intimidation. The operation of the Programme is supported by Section 40 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999 which makes it an offence for any person, without lawful authority, to try to identify the whereabouts or any new identity of a witness who has been relocated under the Programme. The offence is punishable on indictment by a fine or a term of imprisonment of up to five years.
The Garda Síochána rigorously enforces the provisions in the law relating to witness intimidation and protection. In circumstances where the Senior Investigation Officer in a case has identified a witness who is crucial to the case and the evidence to be preferred is not available elsewhere, and there is a serious threat to the life of the witness or his/her family an application can be made, with the consent of the witness, to have him/her included in the Witness Security Programme. Where a threat to or intimidation of a witness or a potential witness arises during the course of criminal proceedings, the matter may be addressed through the trial judge, who has discretion to revoke bail or place other sanctions on the accused/suspect.
With regard to the number of recorded incidents of witness intimidation in each of the past ten years and to date in 2013, I have requested the information from the Garda authorities and will communicate with the Deputy as soon as the information is to hand.
127. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the reason the Irish flag was not raised on a building (details supplied) in County Kerry on St. Patrick's Day and Easter weekend; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28478/13]
View answerThe Department of Justice and Equality have personnel in a wide range of office facilities across the State. The policy of the Department is to fly the national flag on key buildings at all times. Apart from these key buildings, Departmental policy is that the national flag will not be flown on days when buildings would normally be closed, including St. Patrick's Day and Easter, in order to avoid giving rise to additional personnel costs associated with raising and lowering the national flag. The Department of Justice building in Killarney fully complies with Departmental policy in all respects. I can advise the Deputy that the policy is sufficiently flexible so as to comprehend potential exceptions to the situation outlined above on a case by case basis.
128. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will allocate additional resources to the Garda in Tallaght, Dublin 24, to allow it to continue to respond efficiently to the anti-social behaviour on an estate (details supplied) in Dublin 24, which resulted in serious public order incidents on 6 June 2013; if he will give assurances to the local community on the matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28482/13]
View answerAs the Deputy will be aware, the Garda Commissioner is responsible for the detailed allocation of resources, including personnel, throughout the organisation and I have no direct function in the matter. This allocation of resources is constantly monitored in the context of demographics, crime trends, policing needs and other operational strategies in place on a District, Divisional and Regional level to ensure optimum use is made of Garda resources and the best possible Garda service is provided to the public.
Insofar as the specific matters referred to by the Deputy are concerned, I am informed by the Garda authorities that Community Gardaí in Tallaght Garda District have engaged with members of the local community to address incidents of anti-social behaviour in the area. Gardaí are also liaising directly with the other stakeholders including South Dublin County Council to identify and put into effect solutions to the problems being experienced.
Gardaí at Tallaght perform regular patrols of the area in question and all incidents of anti-social behaviour are dealt with appropriately. The Community Policing unit has lead responsibility for policing in this area and has evolved a good partnership approach to problem solving with the local community. Current Policing policy in the Tallaght District is predicated on the prevention of public order offences, the prevention of crime including crimes of violence against persons and property and the maintenance of an environment conducive to the improvement of quality of life of the residents of the area. Local Garda management are continuing to monitor the area and to ensure that resources are effectively deployed to meet the policing needs that arise.
129. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will re-examine the case of a person (details supplied) in County Longford in respect of whom a deportation order has been made but whose case also merits further consideration in view of the fact that many of their family and local community members in their homeland were executed and that there is considerable evidence to suggest their life is in danger if returned to their homeland; if the deportation order will be revoked pending a full investigation, notwithstanding the previous assessment of the case and bearing in mind that considerable changes in circumstances have taken place since 2004; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28493/13]
View answerI refer the Deputy to the Reply given to his Parliamentary Question No. 175 of the 25 April, 2013. The status of the person concerned is as set out in that reply.
However, if new information or circumstances have come to light, which have a direct bearing on his case and which has arisen since the original Deportation Order was made, there remains the option of applying to me for revocation of the Deportation Order pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (11) of the Immigration Act, 1999, as amended. However I wish to make clear that such an application would require substantial grounds to be successful nor would it be considered until such time as the person concerned complies with the terms of the Deportation Order.
Reply to PQ Number 175 of the 25 April, 2013
The person concerned is the subject of a Deportation Order signed on 11th March 2005 following a comprehensive and thorough examination of his asylum claim and of his application to remain in the State. He has been evading his deportation since 19 May 2005 and should he come to the notice of the Gardaí, he would be liable to arrest and detention. He should, therefore, present himself to the Garda National Immigration Bureau without any further delay.
As a matter of policy, I do not intend to reward persons who have failed a very fair, thorough and comprehensive asylum process, and who have then proceeded to evade their deportation for several years.
Queries in relation to the status of individual immigration cases may be made directly to the INIS by e-mail using the Oireachtas Mail facility which has been specifically established for this purpose. This service enables up to date information on such cases to be obtained without the need to seek information by way of the Parliamentary Questions process. The Deputy may consider using the e-mail service except in cases where the response from the INIS is, in the Deputy’s view, inadequate or too long awaited.
130. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Justice and Equality when he will publish a national policy on the operation of the community text alert scheme (details supplied); his views on whether the lack of such a national system is impeding its roll-out; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28500/13]
View answerI am informed by the Garda authorities that a Text Alert crime prevention initiative is being developed under the auspices of An Garda Síochána, Muintir na Tire, Neighbourhood Watch, the Irish Farmers Association and related stakeholders. I am further informed that the initiative is being piloted in a number of locations so as to inform the development of an overall text alert policy and that this process is an advanced stage.
131. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will outline the processes which took place to appoint the 14 commissioners designate of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission; if the selection panel set up for the specific purpose of independently identifying candidates has had a full role in the appointment of the chief commissioner role in the new body; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28504/13]
View answer133. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will assure Dáil Éireann that the appointments process for commissioners designate to the new Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has been fully consistent with existing equality legislation; if trade unions and employer authorities have had the opportunity to make nominations consistent with legislation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28511/13]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 131 and 133 together.
As the Deputy will be aware, I submitted the General Scheme of the Bill to establish the new Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality and Defence in June 2012 for its consideration and views. I specifically asked for an early response on the proposed selection process for the members of the new Commission. The Committee recommended that the Selection Panel envisaged in the Heads should be gender-balanced and the persons on the panel should have a proven track record and expertise in the field of human rights and equality. They also suggested that a person serving on the Panel should be ineligible to become a member of the Commission whose members they are selecting. I accepted all these recommendations. Subsequently, an independent Selection Panel was appointed by me to manage the selection process and make a recommendation as to the persons to be appointed to the new Commission.
Advertisements inviting expressions of interest for the position of Chief Commissioner and of "ordinary" member appeared in the media in November 2012. The Panel forwarded its recommendations of 14 names to me in March 2013. While the persons recommended by the Selection Panel cannot be appointed to the IHREC in advance of the required legislation being enacted and commenced, the Government has appointed the 14 individuals as members of the Human Rights Commission. These 14 persons will be appointed as members of IHREC when the legislation is enacted.
The Selection Panel reported to me that it has not proved possible to recruit a Chief Commissioner at this time. This issue requires time for reflection and consultation and I am currently considering how best to progress the appointment of a Chief Commissioner.
As I indicated in my reply to Parliamentary Question No. 170 of 9 May it is a fundamental requirement of the Paris Principles that the members of the IHREC be independent. This includes but is not limited to being independent of Government. The question of whether Commissioners should be nominated by any social partner organisation or be representative of any particular sector or NGO was expressly considered by the Working Group I established to advise me on practical issues in relation to the establishment of a new Commission. The Group recommended that members of the new Commission be selected by a process independent of the Government, serving on appointment independently in their individual capacity and that their appointments should not be made on representative or nomination basis as heretofore was the case in relation to a number of positions on the Equality Authority Board.
I accepted this recommendation and it is reflected in the General Scheme as published. The selection procedure set out in the Heads was also endorsed by the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality. While I hope to be in a position to publish the Bill shortly, I am concerned at the length of time the Equality Authority has been without a board and the implications of this situation for proper corporate governance. As an immediate step, I have with the agreement of the members designate appointed 12 of them to the Board of the Equality Authority. This satisfies the requirements of section 41 of the Employment Equality Act, as amended, that the board consist of not less than 12 and not more than 16 persons, and be gender balanced.
I might also mention that the new legislation will allow IHREC to establish subcommittees of the Commission to enable representatives of a wide range of interests, including employee and employer interests, to contribute in an advisory capacity.
I am concerned that any appointments that might be made outside of the independent selection process that has recently concluded could attract adverse comment and possibly have adverse implications for the accreditation of the new Commission as an 'A' status national human rights institution. Nonetheless, I am keeping the question of social partner appointments under review in the light of progress on drafting of the Bill.
132. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he is satisfied that the adjustment measures proposed in the Haddington Road agreement for members of An Garda Síochána will not adversely impact on the quality of policing provided at present in view of the closure of Garda stations and the overall reduction in funding provided for the force in the past few years; if he has commissioned a study of the impact of said measures; if so, if he will provide this information; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28505/13]
View answerThe Haddington Road Agreement provides for a review of all aspects of the operation and administration of the Garda Síochána. All factors relevant to the continued delivery of an effective policing service will be taken into account in this review.
The terms of the Review are to "encompass all aspects of the operation and administration of An Garda Síochána including:
- the structure, organisation and staffing of An Garda Síochána;
- the deployment of members and civilian staff to relevant and appropriate roles;
- the remuneration and conditions of service of members of An Garda Síochána, including an evaluation of annualised hours/shift pay arrangements;
- the appropriate structured and mechanism for the future resolution of matters relating to pay, industrial relations and attendance matters."
The objective is, and will be, that at all times the most effective and efficient service is provided to the public at all times.
