The decision by the Minister for Justice, Mr O'Donoghue to introduce anti-corruption legislation to cover TDs, senators and judges, and Irish citizens holding legislative, elected or administrative office abroad, is to be welcomed. The legislation, to be published next week, has been specifically designed to allow the Government meet its international obligations under three international conventions on corruption involving the EU, the Council of Europe and the OECD. The legislation widens the definition of office holder in the 1995 Ethics in Public Office Act to include members of the judiciary, the Dail and the Seanad.
The new Bill does not, however, go far enough. It falls short of the general anti-corruption provisions contained in a Private Members Bill published last March by Fine Gael. To be fair to Mr O'Donoghue, he recognises the limited nature of this legislation and, according to the Minister's officials, work is already well advanced on a new Criminal Justice Fraud Bill, designed to deal with the whole issue of corrupt and fraudulent practices within the wider, business community.
There has been long-standing criticism of the adequacy of the law dealing with fraud and white collar crime in this jurisdiction. The legislation to deal with the findings of the four tribunals established in recent years - to examine matters involving fraud and dishonesty in public life - dates back to the corruption acts of 1889, 1906 and 1916.
The Coalition Government has a duty in these days of Public Accounts Committee investigations and tribunal hearings to reassure the public that comprehensive action is being taken to root out corruption, bribery and fraud at all levels of society. While the new Criminal Justice Fraud Bill may go some way towards achieving that, the best part of a year may pass before its provisions become law. As Mr Charles Flanagan of Fine Gael has suggested, in relation to his Private Members Bill, the only way of responding adequately to growing public cynicism about business and the conduct of public affairs is by criminalising the practices of bribery, corruption, `payola', secret commissions and abuse of public office. Mr Flanagan also proposed that the burden of proof be placed on the shoulders of anyone charged under the Bill.
Citizens should not conclude that corruption is rampant in our society simply because action is being taken to modernise our laws on fraud and dishonesty. This is good legislative housekeeping and should have been done years ago. The decision by the Government to prioritise action required to ratify three important international conventions is understandable. In that regard, a new "corruption in office" offence will apply to European Commissioners, MEPs, judges of the European Court of Justice, members of the Court of Auditors, diplomats and other Irish persons holding elected or administrative office abroad. The new Bill is an important first step. Action on a wider front to modernise our laws so as to punish white collar crime, fraud and dishonesty in business must remain a priority.