Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 11 Jun 1992

Vol. 421 No. 2

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Transfer of Sentenced Persons.

Tony Gregory

Ceist:

14 Mr. Gregory asked the Minister for Justice if he will outline when the Government hope to ratify the Convention for the Transfer of Sentenced Persons.

Ireland is a party to the Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons but legislation will be required to enable it to be ratified.

The basic aim of the convention is a humanitarian one which will make it possible for persons sentenced to imprisonment in a foreign country to transfer to their own country, where the two countries involved are parties to the convention, to serve out their sentences. The Government are committed to achieving the basic humanitarian purpose of the convention.

A major difficulty so far as this country is concerned is the potential imbalance between the number who might seek transfer into this country and the number who might seek transfer out. It is estimated that there are up to 1,000 Irish nationals in foreign prisons, of whom up to 500 are in prisons in Britain, who could qualify for transfer to this country under the convention. On the other hand, there are no more than 40 or so prisoners in this country who could qualify for transfer out. While it is impossible to predict accurately the number of Irish nationals in prison abroad who would wish to return here, even low levels of transfer would pose a substantial problem for us because of the lack of spare prison accommodation.

I am satisfied that an arrangement should be made to meet the more urgent and deserving cases and my intention, therefore, is to propose that we would ratify the convention on a basis which would limit the excess of inward over outward transfers to small proportions. I understand that ratification of the convention on such a basis just might be possible.

My Department already have a very long list of priority legislation on hands and while I am conscious of the need for urgency, and intend to give ratification of the convention as much priority as possible, I cannot at this stage say when the required draft legislation will be finalised.

Does the Minister agree that the Government signed this convention on 20 August 1986 and that despite repeated requests in this House each year since then they have failed to ratify it? Is the Minister serious about ratifying the convention and can he give a timescale for ratification? Since he has given detailed statistics, can he say how many prisoners abroad have applied to be transferred to this country? Does he not agree that the vast majority of those in prison abroad would have families in those countries and would not apply to come here? Would he also agree that the Irish Commission on Prisoners Overseas have estimated that in the first year of ratification 50 prisoners at most would apply for transfer here and after that fewer than ten per year? They have studied in detail the likely number of applications from prisoners abroad.

I indicated that I was interested in ratifying the convention but that it would require legislation. If it could be done without legislation, I would do it today. It has not top priority. I have a few Bills which I want to bring into the House but certainly I would like to see the convention ratified as early as possible, on the basis that we would seek an understanding to limit the excess of inward over outward transfers to small proportions. That is all we can cater for. I accept that many of the 1,000 prisoners might not wish to be considered. Their families may not be in this country. Under the terms of the convention, both Governments and the sentenced person have to agree to the transfer. It does not work unless it is agreed on all sides. I am interested in seeing this brought about but a large transfer of persons would cause very substantial accommodation problems in our jails. I should like to see it happen for the most urgent cases as quickly as possible.

I put it to the Minister that he has no intention in the near future of introducing this and that he has been ruled entirely by monetary considerations. What price justice? We are talking about basic human rights and all the Minister talks about are the inadequacies in the prison service. Let us build more prisons and give it priority.

If I were to listen to what the Deputy said in starting his contribution I would not be replying, except to say that the Minister has an interest in it. It will be dealt with by legislation as soon as the Minister can deal with it.

A disgracefully inadequate reply.

The Deputy has a real interest in these matters.

Would the Minister agree that potentially 1,000 prisoners could come back to Ireland? I accept that it is unlikely the full number would seek to do so. If 1,000 prisoners opted to return it would cost the State £34 million. That has to be a consideration. There is no suggestion that any of the people being referred to have been wrongly convicted and sentenced in other countries. Until such time as we solve our domestic overcrowding problems within our jails the State is not in a position fully to implement this convention and we should not pretend otherwise.

I gave a figure of £660 per week as the cost of keeping a prisoner in jail. I made that clear to Deputy Gregory who took a responsible attitude. There is no other way we could accommodate the kind of numbers involved. I was interested in ratifying it on the understanding that the numbers would be low and we might be able to accommodate the most deserving cases.

Would the Minister——

Sorry, I must advise the House that we have exceeded by five minutes the time allocated to——

May I put a one sentence supplementary?

One leads to two and the two leads to three, unfortunately.

It is only a one sentence supplementary?

We will have one sentence from the Deputy and one sentence from the Minister. We will have to move on.

Would the Minister agree, in the context of the huge increase in crime we have domestically, that priority must be given to ensuring that those sentenced by our courts to terms of imprisonment carry out those sentences within our prisons and that must be the first priority so we must be in a position to ensure that before we implement this convention?

I would like to see the punctuation of that sentence, Deputy.

We must have an understanding attitude towards alternatives to custody. That is my policy.

Will the Minister agree that if a Government have no intention of ratifying a convention, it should follow that they should not sign it? Bearing in mind that our Government are this week signing international conventions in Rio, does the Government's very poor record on this convention not show this country in a very poor light? Does it not discredit our international reputation that six years after signing an international convention we still cannot give a timescale for ratifying it?

The Deputy has misunderstood me. I have put it on record that we propose to ratify the convention.

It requires legislation, consequently the Minister cannot do it today. We have signed it on 20 August 1986. Several other countries who signed have not ratified it. I am not putting it forward as an excuse——

The majority of countries have ratified it.

——but countries like Germany, Portugal and Norway have signed but not ratified. We are going to ratify but I want it done in a way that will not put an extraordinary burden on the existing situation.

Sin sin agus caithimid buail ar aghaidh.

Barr
Roinn