Decision to hold referendum on bail welcomed

OPPOSITION parties welcomed the Government's decision to hold a referendum to amend the Constitution on bail.

The Minister for Justice Mrs Owen, moving the Sixteenth Amendment of the Constitution Bill, said the changes proposed would tilt the balance in favour of the victims of crime and protection of the community. The amendment, if passed by the people next month, would do just that.

Under a Supreme Court decision in 1965 bail could be refused by the courts on only two grounds: the likelihood that an accused would not turn up for trial or would interfere with witnesses or evidence.

"This means that it is not open to our courts at present when considering a bail application to take into account at all the question of a person committing serious offences if released on bail even where, for example, the accused has a long track record of being involved in serious crime while on bail on previous occasions."

If people believed that situation was wrong the only way to change it was by amending the Constitution.

Opponents of the amendment claimed that our prisons would not be capable of coping with the extra numbers of prisoners who would have to be accommodated on remand. That overlooked the major programme of prison building which led to the provision of about 800 extra places, an increase of one-third of existing accommodation.

Refusal of bail would not apply automatically. The conditions would be set out in legislation and would take account of the seriousness of the offence, previous convictions and whether the accused was charged with other offences.

Amending the bail laws was no panacea for dealing with the crime problem. "But the referendum provides a practical opportunity for people who are so understandably concerned about crime to use their democratic franchise to make a difference for the better to the quality of life in our society."

The Fianna Fail spokesman on justice, Mr John O'Donoghue, said the Government's change of heart on this issue since it voted down a FE Bill last year was welcome.

"The principle behind this amendment cannot be considered as constitutional `adventurism' of any sort which would render our laws out of line with international norms. It would merely give people in this country the type of protection which other countries have for some years past, recognised as being necessary.

Mr Des O'Malley (PD, Limerick East) welcomed the Bill but suggested an alternative wording which would allow the courts to have regard to the seriousness of the offence, the circumstances of the arrest, the character of the accused and other matters. If the amendment was passed it would still put an obligation on the State to prove that an accused intended committing another crime.