SALLINS, the Kerry Babies, Christy Lynch, Peter Pringle, the Vincent Connell murder case, the Tallaght Two. Who said we did not have miscarriages of justice in Ireland? And just two weeks ago the Frederick Flannery murder trial collapsed after what the judge described as appalling conduct by gardai. And( that was all under the existing law. What is likely to happen with seven day detention, curbs on the right to silence and bail refused before trial?
That is why it has been necessary for bodies like the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) to sound at warning note in the midst of the deafening clamour for tougher and tougher law and order policies in the wake of the murder of Veronica Guerin. It has not been a very popular message and it seems to have got Kevin Myers and Austin Kenny, of the Garda News, into a bit of a lather.
Surely, however, we should have learned something from the experience of the Prevention of Terrorism Act in Britain. Laws rushed through at moments of high and understandable emotion can lead to a lot of injustice down the road. And" they are notoriously hard to get rid of once enacted. Look at the second World War state of emergency that lasted here from 1939 to 1976, when it was promptly renewed, only coming to an end last year.
Some of the wilder demands seem to have been quietly dropped, such as the Fianna Fail Progressive Democrats call for a new state of emergency. But we have ended up with a Bill allowing for seven day detention and restrictions on the right to silence, and a promise of a referendum to allow bail to be refused on, suspicion that the accused might commit offences in the future. And the Government is apparently considering sending drugs related cases to the non jury Special Criminal Court for trial.
Seven day detention is unlikely to any effect on professional themselves who will have schooled to sit it out. But it will have a devastating effect on drug abusers and other vulnerable people who will be so desperate to get it" over with that they will sign anything or name anybody, no matter innocent. Have we forgotten the saga of the Guildford Four?
Bringing the suspect before a judge to extend the detention, as proposed, may safeguard against physical brutality but will be no protection against the psychological effects of prolonged detention. And allowing the courts to draw an inference of guilt from the silence of the accused is also unlikely to have any significant effect on the professional criminal. The threat of using it, however, can frighten confused and vulnerable people into making incriminating and often untrue statements.
Refusing bail on suspicion of what people might do in the future is bound to lead to at least some innocent people being imprisoned until they are acquitted if they are acquitted. How can they be compensated for that and for the loss of jobs or job opportunities and the suspicion of their neighbours that will flow from imprisonment, whatever the outcome of their trial? A much better way of reducing the level of offences committed while on bail would be speedier trials, reporting conditions while on bail and/or, stiffer penalties for offending while" on bail. As for trying drugs offences in the Special Criminal Court, jury trial is the cornerstone of our justice system.
It is important to remember as well that this State is a party to a whole series of international human rights treaties and covenants. The rights and liberties we talk about protecting are not just something dreamed up by the ICCL or other, bleeding heart liberals, they are part of the fabric of civilised and democratic societies everywhere.
People are angry and frustrated about crime, and the cold blooded murder of a journalist who was also the mother of a young child was particularly chilling. But the harsh measures being called for now would not solve the problem and would only drag our society closer to the level of those responsible for Veronica Guerin's death.
It is not as if our system cossets the accused as things stand. Our prisons have been condemned by report after report as grossly overcrowded and rife with drugs. Where" would they put all the remand prisoners if the bail laws are changed?
Unfortunately, the clamour for tougher laws has obscured the debate on how to get to the root of the drugs problem by curtailing the demand for drugs. Treatment facilities for addicts, education programmes, and investment in the dead end inner city areas that are racked by this scourge would do a lot more to solve the problem that panic measures by parties that ignored the drug crisis when it was developing 10 or 15 years ago.
Finally Kevin Myers has got very indignant at the focus by the ICCL and its Northern sister organisation the Committee on the Administration on Justice (CAJ), on human rights abuses by the state rather than by non state bodies, whether the IRA or drug dealers. Both ICCL and CAJ are committed to non violence, but they concentrate on the actions of governments because governments are given very wide powers by the people on the understanding that they will respect human rights.
Governments claim a monopoly on the use of force and on law enforcement and they must in turn be answerable for their use of that monopoly. Paramilitary or criminal organisations do not pretend to be answerable to anyone for their actions or to observe human rights standards. Civilisation and democracy depend on the state observing, the rules. If it does not do so, there is, no chance that paramilitary or criminal groups will.
