There are few more likely times for erroneous decisions to be made in a democracy than when politicians are in full flight from - or with public fury. This ancient truth should be borne fully in mind while assessing the Government's package of anti crime measures in the wake of the murder of Veronica Guerin, a crime which has rightly stirred public opinion to an unprecedented degree.
Whatever the merits of the individual measures now under consideration, one must be very cautious about political judgements reached under such duress and against a background of such culpable political neglect. They must be examined and considered with the greatest care and fully debated, not adopted in a spirit of panic and emotion. They must be subject to political review and judicial supervision, not left to executive implementation alone. What is under consideration represents a very significant departures from traditional freedoms, on which even a small likelihood of executive abuse would be unacceptable.
It cannot be denied that the Government is bound to respond to the depth of public outrage. The measures under consideration bring together a variety of approaches and remedies for the apprehension of serious criminals. They include such significant departures from existing practice as suspension of the right to silence, changes in the bail laws, seven day detention, the use of the special criminal courts, recruiting more Gardai, building more prison space, the creation of specialist serious crime units and the granting of powers for courts to freeze assets when advised that individuals are suspected of accumulating them illegally.
These measures draw on very different sources of inspiration and are brought together eclectically and in haste. They must be very carefully scrutinised, from the outset, by the public and the Oireachtas. Whatever is agreed in that timeframe should be subject to more long term political review and to the discipline of comprehensive and expert examination which can draw on comparative research and plan the optimum approach to serious crime and the drug culture. A striking feature of the political response in recent days has been the candour with which politicians have admitted the tendency up to now to marginalise or contain such matters within the public agenda, rather than to tackle them with the commitment and determination that is required.
That is why the case for a commission on criminal justice, repeatedly put forward by this newspaper, stands just as validly alongside consideration of semi emergency measures in response to public demand. It would be quite possible to assemble the personnel and the mandate for such a commission rapidly and effectively indeed, were it to be given a relatively tight timescale within which to report, findings could be used to review hastily adopted measures. A commission should be asked to examine the nature of crime in this State both quantitatively and qualitatively, to assess the required responses in policing, courts and prisons and to set out clearly what choices face government and people in these respects.
Recent trenchant reports from the Law Reform Commission and the Working Party on a Courts Commission examining the courts system have demonstrated a readiness to address the need for legal change radically and in a progressive manner. It would be foolish not to apply the same talents to the criminal justice system as a whole.