Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 seem cognate and may be discussed together.
Private Members' Business. - Criminal Justice Bill, 1963— Committee Stage (Resumed).
SECTION 1.
Both these amendments refer to anybody assisting the Garda or prison officer referred to in subparagraph (i).
These amendments seek to expand the categories. I am not in favour of what is proposed in them, even if they do seem logical. I am not moving them.
Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 not moved.
The same argument would apply to amendment No. 4. Deputy McGilligan is attempting to enlarge the categories.
Amendment No. 4 not moved.
In regard to amendment No. 5 also in the name of Deputy McGilligan, has the Minister any views on it?
Deputy McGilligan wants to delete sections 7 and 9. I do not understand that because they are more or less on the same footing as the other sections which he is leaving in.
Amendment No. 5 not moved.
Amendment No. 6 not moved.
I move amendment No. 7:
In subsection (1), page 2, to delete lines 29 and 30.
The section, as drafted, purports to retain penalties for certain military offences committed by enemy prisoners-of-war. On further consideration, it seems to me that it is inappropriate to do this as the object of making these prisoners-of-war subject to military law was merely to facilitate the exercise of discipline over them. Accordingly, we propose to delete the two lines which extend the provisions about the retention of the death penalty to them, that is, lines 29 and 30.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 1, as amended, agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
SECTION 3.
Amendment No. 8, in the name of Deputy McGilligan, is purely a drafting amendment and I do not think Deputy McGilligan is right.
Amendment No. 8 not moved.
Section 3 agreed to.
NEW SECTION.
I formally move amendment No. 9:
Before section 4 to insert a new section as follows:
"Subject to the provisions of section 1 where a person kills another unlawfully the killing shall not amount to murder (a) unless it was done with an actual intent to kill or to cause really serious injury to the person killed or (b) unless the person charged, when he did the act which caused the death of the person killed, had full knowledge that it was likely to have that result."
I am glad Deputy O'Higgins has done this because it gives me the opportunity of saying that I am not satisfied with our section either. However, I am not satisfied with the amendment Deputy McGilligan proposes and I should like to suggest that this matter be left over to Report Stage. I shall be bringing in a further revised section which I hope will be acceptable.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
SECTION 4.
I move amendment No. 10:
In page 3, line 25, before "Where" to insert "Subject to the provision of section 1".
Amendments Nos. 10 and 11 are in the same category.
I formally move them and withdraw them.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 11:
In page 3, line 33, to delete "in other cases" and substitute "when not done in the course of or furtherance of another offence".
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 4 agreed to.
Sections 5 and 6 agreed to.
NEW SECTION.
I move amendment No. 12:
In page 3, before section 7, to insert a new section as follows:—
7.—Section 63 of the Juries Act, 1927 (which relates to the separation of jurors during trials) is hereby amended by the substitution in subsections (1) and (2), for "murder", of "capital murder".
This amendment might be said to be consequential on the abolition of the death penalty in ordinary murder cases. As the law stands, jurors must be kept locked up in trials for murder and treason. In any other trial, the judge may at his discretion permit the jury to separate before considering their verdict. I think it is logical that, having abolished the death penalty for ordinary murders, we should abolish the requirement that jurors be locked up in these cases. I propose that in future the only trials in which the judge will be prohibited from allowing jurors to separate will be those for capital murder and treason.
I should just like to be clear about this. This still leaves the discretion to the judge in the case of non-capital murders. It might very often be considered important from the point of view of the accused that the jurors should be locked up.
The judge can still keep them together, if he wants to.
Amendment agreed to.
Sections 7 to 10, inclusive, agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.
Next Stage?
I think we might order it for Thursday morning. I am in a bit of a difficulty with regard to constructive malice. I want to bring in a new section to cover that, and I might bring it in in the Seanad and bring it back here after Christmas to discuss it fairly fully. It is a very important aspect of the Bill. I do not know what Deputy O'Higgins thinks about it.
I would prefer to consider it. We can order it for Thursday.
Report Stage ordered for Thursday, 12th December, 1963.