OFFENCES ACT REVIEW: A series of legislative proposals relating to the law on international terrorism are in the pipeline, the Minister for Justice said yesterday.
Mr McDowell said that, while we had a comprehensive body of legislation on internal subversion, there was a gap in the law relating to offences against international justice and human rights. He said the Review of the Offences Against the State Acts, launched yesterday, would feed into that legislation.
The review was promised by the Government following the signing of the Belfast Agreement in 1998, and a committee was set up under the chairmanship of Mr Justice Anthony Hederman. Its terms of reference were the effect of the agreement on the normalisation of security, the threat posed by international terrorism and organised crime, and Ireland's obligations under international law.
Speaking at the publication of its report yesterday, the Minister paid tribute to its members who had worked so long and hard on dealing with an area of "interface in which deep constitutional issues are at stake."
As reported in The Irish Times on May 30th last, the review contains a majority and a minority report, and Mr McDowell warned against coming to any quick conclusions without a careful study of the whole document.
Speaking at length about jury trial, he stressed that it had been established by our Constitution as the norm, and he pledged that, as long as he was Minister for Justice, it would not be diluted. He told the journalists present he hoped the time would come when every trial would be before a jury.
However, he added: "There is a different world out there. There are evil people willing to take away innocent human life to promote their own agenda. They want to promote civil war in Northern Ireland and unravel the peace process.
"The safety of the people is the supreme goal. We can't have a situation where people can be gunned down. I endorse fully what the Minister for Foreign Affairs said yesterday. We will meet the challenge head on with all the legal mechanisms available to us."
Asked about the use of the Special Criminal Court for organised crime, and the protection of the anonymity of the jury, issues examined in the report, he said he was not going to make a comment at this stage.
Referring to the tradition of trial by jury, he said: "There are some people who feel that jury trial is a relic of medieval feudal society, a difficult mechanism to bring to bear on criminal law. This is not a view I hold myself, and it is not in the Constitution.
"The common law world has been uniquely successful in relation to the rule of law. There has never been an implosion or a collapse of the rule of law. This contrasts with every other system in the rest of the world; where governments collapse, tyrannies emerge."
The common law system, adversarial, based on an independent judiciary and where the fate of individuals was decided by 12 people adjudicating on the facts, was essential to that, he said. He added that there were circumstances where those that threatened that system could be tried without a jury. However, the mechanism of a jury remained a fundamental constitutional value. "It is incumbent on the State to strengthen it and make it effective."
Referring to the two divergent views in the report, he said this enhanced its value. "I would be suspicious of a report if it attempted to get unanimity on such fundamental questions," he said.