Written Answers Nos. 160-166
160. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the total strength of An Garda Síochána in each of the years from 2004 to date inclusive; the extent to which the strength in the various divisions have fluctuated over that period; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40077/13]
View answer161. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the strength of An Garda Síochána throughout each division and sub-division in County Kildare from 2004 to date in 2013; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40078/13]
View answer164. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the extent to which the JLO service is available throughout County Kildare; the extent of any anticipated improvements in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40081/13]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 160, 161 and 164 together.
The Deputy will be aware that 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.
It is not practical to give a detailed analysis of the fluctuations in Garda strengths at Divisional level over the last ten years. What can be stated is that the allocation of resources is constantly monitored by the Commissioner and his senior management team in the context of demographics, crime trends, policing needs and other operational strategies in place on a District, Divisional and Regional level. The objective at all times is to ensure that optimum use is made of Garda resources and the best possible Garda service is provided to the public.
This monitoring includes the allocation of Gardai to specific roles such as Juvenile Liaison Officer. While all Gardaí have a role to play in liaising with juveniles as and when the need arises, there are two Gardaí specifically assigned to these duties in the Kildare Division.
The Commissioner has informed me that the other details which the Deputy has requested are set out in the tables hereunder:
Total strength of An Garda Síochána by year:
|
Year |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
31/08/13 |
|
Strength |
12,209 |
12,264 |
12,954 |
13,755 |
14,412 |
14,547 |
14,377 |
13,894 |
13,424 |
13,190 |
Strength of An Garda Síochána in each Station in Kildare by year:
|
Station |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
31/08/13 |
|
Athy |
16 |
18 |
19 |
18 |
23 |
27 |
29 |
31 |
34 |
32 |
|
Ballytore* |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
- |
|
Castledermot |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
|
Carbury |
2 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
|
Kilcock |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
9 |
|
Kilcullen |
3 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
|
Kildare |
27 |
26 |
31 |
30 |
32 |
32 |
33 |
26 |
37 |
29 |
|
Leixlip |
28 |
25 |
25 |
24 |
28 |
33 |
35 |
34 |
30 |
38 |
|
Monasterevin |
3 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
|
Newbridge |
29 |
32 |
33 |
33 |
35 |
44 |
45 |
47 |
50 |
49 |
|
Rathangan |
3 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
|
Robertstown |
3 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
2 |
2 |
|
Ballymore Eustace* |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
- |
|
Celbridge |
17 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
18 |
18 |
17 |
17 |
15 |
|
Clane |
6 |
5 |
8 |
7 |
8 |
8 |
10 |
11 |
9 |
8 |
|
Kill* |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
- |
|
Maynooth |
15 |
15 |
17 |
16 |
18 |
15 |
15 |
13 |
14 |
11 |
|
Naas |
78 |
80 |
89 |
98 |
103 |
107 |
101 |
101 |
103 |
104 |
*These stations were closed on 31st January 2013.
162. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality when he will compile a list of validly registered charities in accordance with the 2009 Act with particular reference to the continued need to preserve the integrity of the sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40079/13]
View answerThe Charities Act 2009 provides for an integrated system of mandatory registration and proportionate regulation and supervision of the charities sector in Ireland. The various sections of the Charities Act are subject to implementation through commencement orders. Sections that it was possible to commence in advance of the establishment of the Charities regulatory Authority, as provided for under the Act, have been commenced. The remainder will be commenced following the establishment of the Authority. One of the functions of the new Authority will be to establish and maintain a public register of charities. It is therefore necessary to establish the new Authority before this register is put in place.
The Deputy will appreciate that the full implementation of the Charities Act, including the establishment of the Authority and register of charities, had to be examined in the context of the comprehensive review of expenditure, which took place in 2011. Arising from this review, I have delayed bringing this legislation into force as we considered how best to achieve the objectives of the Act in a context of Government spending reductions. It has always remained an objective of the Government to strengthen the regulation of the sector in effective and proportionate ways and, to advance this, a public and stakeholder consultation on the implementation of the Charities Act 2009, and the establishment of a register of charities, was carried out by my Department earlier this year and published in July.
Arising from our review of possible options in relation to the regulation of the charities sector and also from the extensive feedback received during the consultation, the Government in July approved my plans to proceed with the establishment of an independent Charities Regulatory Authority under the terms of the 2009 Charities Act. It is envisaged that the new Authority will come into operation in 2014.
165. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the degree to which abuse of the bail laws continues to be monitored by his Department; the proposed remedial action including any legislative issues; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40082/13]
View answerA decision to grant bail in a particular case is a matter for the court, which is, subject only to the Constitution and the law, independent in the exercise of its judicial functions. There is a constitutional presumption in favour of bail, since, in the eyes of the law, a person is innocent until proven guilty. The provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights also restrict the extent to which the right to bail can be limited.
Prior to the Sixteenth Amendment of the Constitution, bail could be refused essentially only on the grounds that a person would be likely to abscond or interfere with witnesses. The Bail Act 1997, which gave effect to the terms of the Sixteenth Amendment of the Constitution, provides for the refusal of bail to a person charged with a serious offence where it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent the commission of a serious offence by that person. In addition, section 6 of that Act, as amended by section 9 of the Criminal Justice Act 2007, provides that every bail recognisance is subject to the condition that the accused person shall not commit an offence while on bail.
The criminal law takes a serious view of offences committed by persons on bail. Section 11 of the Criminal Justice Act 1984 provides that any sentence of imprisonment passed on a person for an offence committed while on bail must be consecutive on any sentence passed on him or her for a previous offence, or on the sentence last due to expire, if more than one is being served. It also provides that the fact that an offence was committed while on bail must be treated as an aggravating factor at sentencing and that the court shall impose a sentence that is greater than that which would have been imposed otherwise, unless there are exceptional circumstances.
I am conscious of public concern about the extent to which offences continue to be committed by persons on bail. I share that concern and believe that bail law must be continually reviewed to ensure that all possible avenues are taken to protect the public against the commission of crime, particularly serious crime, by persons on bail.
Accordingly, my Department has been engaged in work to consolidate and update bail law with a view to presenting a clear, accessible and modern statement of the law. In the context of that modernisation of the law, I will be seeking to restructure the law so that it has a focus on the protection of the individual and of the public. The intention is that the new proposals will provide better guidance to the courts on how such protection might be provided. I intend to bring proposals to Government on the matter as soon as possible, having regard to other legislative priorities.
166. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of incidents of witness, juror or court-officer intimidation identified in each of the past five years to date; the extent, if any, to which prosecutions were negatively affected or failed as a result; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40083/13]
View answerThe 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. In addition Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 2009 provides that a witness (other than the accused) may give evidence by video-link where the court is satisfied that the person is likely to be in fear or subject to intimidation in giving evidence
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.
The following table shows the number of proceedings commenced and convictions for offences under Section 41 of the 1999 Act for the years 2008 to 19 September 2013.
|
Year |
Proceedings |
Convictions * |
|
2013 |
10 |
1 |
|
2012 |
16 |
1 |
|
2011 |
58 |
12 |
|
2010 |
43 |
13 |
|
2009 |
31 |
13 |
|
2008 |
18 |
4 |
*Figures are provisional as they are recorded in respect of the year in which proceedings commenced and may change in light of the outcome of court proceedings.
