When last week's column was being written the Northern Ireland Agreement was still some hours from final drafting. Even then it was obvious the next stage in the process - getting a Yes vote in the referendums - would be difficult. The first of the confidence-building measures, the release of nine republican prisoners, has demonstrated just how difficult.
Our TV sets have been bursting with US and British crime dramas for 20 years. We are probably more familiar with their criminal structures than ours. A good example of this is parole. We know about parole and parole boards, except that Ireland doesn't operate that sort of system.
Decisions on the early conditional release of prisoners are routinely taken by the Department of Justice. In serious cases, the decisions are taken by the Minister. In each case a number of criteria must be satisfied before a release. These are:
The length of term already served in relation to the offence for which the prisoner was convicted.
The offender's conduct while in prison.
Any threat to the community arising from early release.
Advice can be taken from a wide range of sources including prison staff, gardai, probation and welfare services, chaplains, psychologists and Department officials. For those with longer sentences, recommendations will be made to the Minister by the Sentence Review Group (SRG). The SRG is independently chaired and is made up of a number of appropriately qualified people.
Obviously the single most important concern when any release is being considered is the risk to the public. The difference the agreement makes to all of this is that, for certain prisoners, broadly those whose criminality arose in the furtherance of a violent campaign, it is now appropriate to look afresh in each case at the question of the threat they might pose.
I said that this was a confidence-building measure. Let me explain. I can't speak for the current Minister but I have been through this process before following the first IRA ceasefire in 1994. Having reassessed the risk to the public of releasing some republican prisoners, we then had to be clear about the message such a release would send.
The message proved simple. That particular government and its successor wanted to indicate to all involved in the peace process that they believed the IRA to be sincere in its desire to find a lasting peace and the Irish government also sincerely wished to end the violence.
At the time it was expected that the British government would reciprocate by releasing some of the prisoners held in its jurisdiction. It didn't happen, and I still believe that is one of the reasons the peace process stalled.
Again, the Irish Government has found itself with the opportunity to signal its commitment to peace. Again, the Government has decided to take that opportunity. This time it is essential that this gesture be taken as sincere. Those who wish to make political capital should reconsider their actions. We have seen other forms of finger-pointing during the last week. Indeed I have been surprised at some of the doubts raised about the prospect of power-sharing between government departments here and in Northern Ireland.
It was suggested, for example, that one couldn't imagine our Department of Justice sharing anything with anyone. For the record, it should be said that Justice has been one of the most enlightened of all our Departments in this whole process, dealing with all the sensitive issues such as security, decommissioning, justice and prisoners.
There is a natural anxiety among gardai in relation to any releases of those prisoners who were involved or are allegedly involved in the deaths of serving members.
The Garda, through its integrity, has left a unique mark on Irish life. Its steadfastness and professionalism in its long battle against terrorism over the years must be acknowledged.
The public will never forget, nor should we be allowed to forget, that in the course of that battle some of our gardai have made the supreme sacrifice to protect the constitutional integrity of this State and the life of its citizens. The Minister and the officials of his Department will no doubt think long and hard when considering releasing prisoners convicted in relation to the deaths of these people.
If the agreement is accepted north and south of the Border (and I believe it will) then the threat to our gardai of violent death at the hands of terrorists will recede. Acceptance should also release funds previously allocated to anti-terrorism; a lot of funds.
From 1969 to 1993 £2.4 billion was spent on security issues relating to Northern Ireland. It is my sincere hope that with this sort of money available the agreement may end up having a profound effect on the damage caused by crime.
This is just one of the boons a successful resolution of the peace process will bring. Because of its scope, the agreement will affect every aspect of life in Ireland; we haven't even begun to examine all the possibilities. In fact we have already seen one major Irish organisation completely miss the importance of one aspect of the agreement.
My former trade union, the INTO, made a decision at its annual conference last weekend to downgrade the Irish language. One of the reasons advanced by the general secretary, Joe O'Toole, for this strange decision was the peace agreement.
It's ironic that in the agreement itself, in the section dealing with rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity, there are seven specific actions to be taken by the British government to protect and promote the Irish language in Northern Ireland.
It's a great insult to the language that the trade union which is best positioned to promote it is launching itself on a course that actively works against the agreement's thrust. I intend to return to this in a future column.