Sir, - I would like to take this opportunity to outline the facts in relation to the forthcoming bail referendum, rather than the spurious arguments put forward in your columns on November 19th.
John Newman states that if it happens that a person is arrested and charged with a serious offence, he or she can then be detained in custody pending a trial for an indeterminate period. Mr Newman is ignoring the facts. A person arrested and charged with a serious offence can only be refused bail by the court if the judge considers it necessary to prevent the commission of a serious crime. The outline legislation lists a number of factors which a judge has to take into account.
Firstly, the nature, degree of seriousness and potential penalty both in relation to the offence the person is charged with, and any other offence which it is feared might be committed if bail is granted. Secondly, a person's previous criminal history, including any offences committed on bail, convictions under appeal and other charges against the accused. Thirdly, the nature and strength of the evidence in support of the charges.
If he courts refuse bail to a person after considering these grounds, then the accused is automatically entitled to a review of the case within four months. There is no indeterminate period, as Mr Newman alleges. In fact, if the courts deem that the prosecution has unduly delayed the case, the judge can release the accused. Of course with the reform of our court system, together with reforms to ensure speedier trials, this waiting period between remand and trial will be significantly cut.
It is time that the people started standing up against the persistent criminal. It is time that we ended their reign of terror while they are out on bail. It is time to get out and vote "Yes" for tougher bail. - Yours, etc.,
National Chairperson, Young Fine Gael, Upper Mount Street, Dublin 2.