|
Minister for Justice,
Equality and Law Reform (Mr. McDowell): I have recently brought
forward proposals concerning anti-social behaviour, including
anti-social behaviour orders, as Committee Stage amendments to the
Criminal Justice Bill 2004.
The Deputy refers to the concerns expressed by the chief executive of
Barnardos UK regarding the alleged routine use of anti-social behaviour
orders for children in that jurisdiction.
I assure the Deputy that in formulating my proposals I have examined the
UK law and its application closely. I have worked closely with my
colleague, the Minister of State with responsibility for children,
Deputy Brian Lenihan, in preparing my proposals. The Deputy will be
aware that, unlike the position in the UK, the proposals Deputy Lenihan
and I have brought forward will establish separate arrangements with
regard to adults and children. This ensures that elements are included
in the arrangements pertaining to children that are appropriate to their
circumstances and needs.
While the UK approach is considered to have provided welcome relief to
many communities I am aware that it has been the subject of some
criticisms, in particular that anti-social behaviour orders have been
used in inappropriate cases. Having regard to these criticisms, the
proposals to be included in the Criminal Justice Bill do not follow the
UK model in many respects. In particular the proposals, in the case of
both adults and children, incorporate a range of safeguards to ensure
that anti-social behaviour orders will only be sought as a last resort.
The definition of anti-social behaviour is designed to ensure that the
orders are used to meet the real and serious needs of communities. Only
the Garda Síochána, of at least superintendent rank, will be empowered
to apply to the courts for orders, whereas in the UK, local authorities
may also apply. Before the making of an application for an order may be
considered, there will first be an explicit duty to formally warn a
person to cease the offending behaviour, which is not the case in the
UK. The court will be able to grant legal aid in appropriate cases and
may only grant the application if it considers an order is a reasonable
and proportionate remedy. The orders will operate for a maximum of two
years, unlike the UK where they operate for a minimum of two years. Full
rights to appeal against an order or to have it varied are being
provided and the penalties for breach of an order will be a maximum of
six months imprisonment. In the UK, the maximum penalty is five years’
imprisonment.
The Minister of State with responsibility for children, Deputy Brian
Lenihan, has brought forward separate proposals to amend the Criminal
Justice Bill 2004 to deal with anti-social behaviour by children, that
is, persons aged 12 but under 18. Those proposals are framed in the
context of the overall philosophy and policy that underpins the Children
Act 2001 and therefore contain additional features to the proposals in
relation to adults. Every effort is made to provide an opportunity for
the child and his or her parents or guardians to address the behavioural
problems in a way that minimises contact with the criminal justice
system. For instance, where a child has been issued with a behaviour
warning by a garda, the local superintendent, on the basis of a report
from a garda in the district, may convene a meeting to discuss the
child’s behaviour. The meeting will be attended by the child, his or her
parents or guardian, the garda who issued the warning and, as
appropriate, the juvenile liaison officer and any other person whom the
superintendent thinks may assist the child. The meeting may result in a
good behaviour contract. The question of admitting the child to the
diversion programme or making an application to the courts for a
behaviour order only arises where the superintendent, having considered
the report from the garda in the district, does not consider that
convening a meeting would help to prevent anti-social behaviour by the
child concerned or the meeting was convened but a good behaviour
contract was not prepared because the child or the parents or guardians
refused to give the necessary undertakings or the child breached an
undertaking given by him or her. Parents or guardians are to be involved
at all important stages of the procedures.
It will be clear from the foregoing that the whole thrust of my
proposals with regard to both adults and children is that an application
to the courts for an order will arise only as a last resort. It will
also be clear that the proposals concerning children already deal with
many of the concerns raised by the chief executive of Barnardos
regarding the operation of anti-social behaviour orders for children in
the UK. |
CiaranCuffe.com