Madam Unhappy at Criminal Justice Bill

Since becoming the third pillar of opposition (after the parties and the unions) Madam Editor has lambasted the government over many issues. This morning’s editorial is once again deeply concerned at how legislation seems to be subordinated to the interests of reelection. Referring to the Criminal Justice Bill 2007 which is due to hit second stage for a few hours on Thursday, Madam suggests that;

“This Bill and the brusque way it is being handled bears the hallmarks of a “general election” module. The Government appears determined to show it is tougher on crime than the Opposition parties, even at the cost of undermining legal principles that have stood the test of time for generations.

The topsy-turvey nature of the Government’s priorities is evident from its decision to suspend all parliamentary sittings this week, to mark St Patrick’s Day, and then to schedule an emergency Dáil debate later in the month. This Criminal Justice Bill requires careful scrutiny and analysis. But the text of the Bill, containing 51 sections, was only published yesterday. And the explanatory memorandum runs to 14 pages. The broad thrust of the Bill was indeed announced last month. But the devil is always in the detail.” From ireland.com

Its not the first and unlikely to be the last time government deploy legislation in this fashion. The timing does seem to curtail debate, coming on the end of the Dail week for five hours. While the Bill has to be passed sometime and many would say it is dearly needed to deal with gangland crime, there are some major issues raised in it relating to bail and the right to silence (and the interpretation of silence). Once the Bill passes second stage in the Dail it has been agreed in principle and amendments made subsequently have to accord with that principle.

It seems unlikely in the week that’s in it that we will see any full debate on the need and merit of adjusting the rights of the citizen. A recent talk at the ICCL made the assertion that removing rights is no way to deal with gangland crime and a rebalancing of the criminal justice system “flies in the face of facts”.

The unfortunate thing is that the cynic wins out because whatever the points the government may make, acting in such haste, at a time when everyone is at other things, smacks of circumventing debate and also of the crass electioneering that Madam alludes to.