In relation to the matter to be raised by Deputy Andrews I am advised that as of yet the person referred to in the request has not been charged in connection with any of the offences. I remind the House that questions of guilt or innocence are matters for decision by the courts and that under the revised sub judice rule there is an onus on Members to avoid comment which might prejudice the outcome of any proceedings arising from the offences. Accordingly, Members should exercise discretion in their contributions and if it can be avoided they should also avoid making reference to persons outside the House by name or so as to be identifiable.
Adjournment Debate. - Blackrock (Dublin) Shop Robberies.
I was motivated to raise this matter by a call from a constituent who is the keyholder of a shop in the Blackrock area of Dublin. He brought to my attention during the week the most extraordinary circumstances involving an individual who has been sentenced to prison for a number of years for aggravated robbery. This individual has been given weekend releases over the last number of months and during the period of his weekend releases he has raided this particular shop nine of the 12 times it has been robbed in recent months.
This is a shocking commentary on the system. The gardaí in Blackrock are among the best in Dublin, if not in the country, and I would not criticise them under any circumstances. I have the greatest respect for the gardaí in Blackrock and Dún Laoghaire. They operate under this system however, and it is difficult for them to deal with this problem.
This is a case where an individual— effectively a social terrorist—is released for the weekend on the revolving door principle. Not only has he attempted to assault his jailers but, in one of his robberies, according to the information given to me by my constituent, he caused £7,500 worth of damage to the premises in question alone.
Last weekend this individual was again apprehended by the Garda, carrying out their work in a decent and generous manner to try to help the citizens who are terrorised by him. I call on the Minister to examine this case in the context of the quite proper admonition given by the Leas-Cheann Comhairle in advance of anything. I might say because, despite this individual's terrible behaviour, I do not want to prejudice his rights in law or his right to freedom. However, we have responsibilities and duties, and this individual has exercised neither. I ask the Minister of State to bring this matter to the attention of the Minister for Justice with a view to seeing if anything can be done about him.
To my knowledge, the individual in question was apprehended last weekend arising out of another attempt on the premises to which he seems to be attracted like a moth to a flame. I would much appreciate it if the Minister would give an undertaking to the House which would enable me to go back to my constituent and tell him, his wife, his family and the people in the locality that this individual will not be allowed to terrorise the keyholders of this shop premises or other individuals in the area.
As a member of the legal profession Deputy Andrews will, I am sure, appreciate the constraints on giving a full response to him on this matter. The person to whom he refers has not been convicted — or charged with — any of the robberies referred to.
The temporary release system has been operated under statute since 1960 by successive Ministers for Justice. While the system of temporary release is soundly based, I am also aware that, because of a shortage of prison accommodation, some offenders serve a smaller proportion of their sentence than would otherwise be the case. Individuals are also granted early release from custody for what are considered justifiable reasons — basically to facilitate resocialisation etc.
Great care is taken in selecting individuals for release, involving consultation with prison authorities, the Garda etc., but we are not aware of any system which can guarantee, with certainty, that no individual released will commit offences during the period of release. The only foolproof way of ensuring this would be not to release anybody. However, all the professional advice is very much against this. Not only would it lack humanity, it would also remove from the system a very important incentive to behave, a very valuable opportunity to resocialise, and would, in all probability, mean that at the conclusion of the sentence, society could find itself dealing with a much more difficult and troublesome individual.
In chapter 5 of the document entitled "The Management of Offenders — A Five Year Plan" which was published last year, there is a review of the current temporary release arrangements with a number of specific proposals for the future. In brief, these proposals provide for a reduction in the number of unsupervised releases in favour of a system where the majority of releases would be closely supervised by the Probation and Welfare Service. The plan also provides for an increase in the number of prison spaces. This aspect is currently under active consideration.
It is, of course, a matter of the greatest concern, when any individual on temporary release commits a serious crime, and I can assure the Deputy that in all such cases a serious breach of this nature will be taken fully into account in the future management of the individual's sentence. The Deputy can be assured that the case he has raised is already the subject of examination by officials in my Department.
Will the Minister communicate with me in due course subsequent to the examination by her officials?
Yes.
The Dáil adjourned at 5.25 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 14 November 1995.