DOCSLIB.ORG

Balance in the Criminal Law Review Group Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Balance in the Criminal Law Review Group Final Report BALANCE IN THE CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW GROUP FINAL REPORT BALANCE IN THE CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW GROUP FINAL REPORT 15 MARCH 2007 Letter from Chairman to Tánaiste . 3 Introduction . 5 Issue 1 - The Right to Silence . 17 Issue 2 – Character Evidence . 100 Issue 3 – Infringements of Constitutional Rights – The Exclusionary Rule . 147 Background . .. 147 Arguments for Change . 155 Arguments against Change . 160 Options for Change . 161 Issue 4 – Requiring a Defence Statement . 167 Advance disclosure of the defence case . 167 Disposal of Admissibility Issues pre-trial . 174 Issue 5 – Extending Alibi Evidence Rules . .. 176 Issue 6 – “With Prejudice” Appeals . 177 Introduction . 177 Constitutional considerations . .. 179 With Prejudice Appeals on indictment . 192 Appeal in respect of District Court Decisions . 198 Issue 7 – Re-opening acquittals following new evidence . 203 Issue 8 – Nullifying acquittals tainted by Trial Tampering . 211 1 Options for Change . 213 Issue 9 – Prosecution Submissions on Sentence . 215 Introduction . 215 The Problem . 219 Options . 220 Views of the Review Group . 221 Issue 10 - Hearsay evidence . 228 Issue 11 – Other Proposals . 233 Identity Parades . 233 The judge’s charge . 234 Victim Impact Reports . 235 Implications for Defence Acts . 240 Other issues which came to the attention of the Group . 240 Summary . 243 Appendices . 255 Appendix 1 - List of submissions made to Group and persons with whom the Group met. 255 Appendix 2 - Draft heads of legislation relating to inferences from silence . 258 Note of Dissent on Right to Silence: Nora Owen and David Gwynn Morgan . 274 Note of Dissent on Exclusionary Rule: Gerard Hogan . 287 2 Letter from Chairman to Tánaiste Michael McDowell, SC, TD, Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, St. Stephen’s Green, Dublin 2 March 15, 2007 Dear Tánaiste, On behalf of the Balance in the Criminal Law Review Group, I have pleasure in enclosing the final report of the Group. You will note that our Report makes certain recommendations regarding the reform of aspects of criminal law, criminal procedure and the law of evidence in criminal cases with a view to striking a fair balance between the rights of the community in general and those of victims of crime in particular on the one hand and the traditional rights of an accused as protected by the Constitution, the European Convention of Human Rights, statute and, indeed, the common law on the other. 3 Yet I cannot help thinking that society must not ignore the fact that the majority of prisoners are drawn from the more disadvantaged sections of the community and that any balanced response to the problems of crime must also have regard to this factor. A large number of prisoners are the product of dysfunctional families and have experienced significant educational, housing and other social disadvantages. Many of them have only ever encountered hardship, disadvantage and failure in their lives and they have often fallen prey to the evils of alcohol and drug addiction. While not for a moment excusing their crimes, the fact remains that some at least of the prison community can justly say that they too are also in one sense the victims of society. The principle that we must hate the sin, but love the sinner is at least two thousand years old, but yet I fear that as a society we have sometimes lost sight of this fact. Although these are matters which stray well beyond the boundaries of the work of the Review Group, these are factors which I nonetheless consider cannot be ignored in the wider public debate. Kind regards, Gerard Hogan Chairman, Balance in the Criminal Law Review Group 4 Introduction The Review Group on Balance in the Criminal Law was established by the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on 1st November 2006, and was required to report by 1st March 2007. The Review Group’s terms of reference were to consider and examine the following issues: · “the right to silence · allowing character evidence of an accused · the exclusionary rule of evidence · requiring the accused to outline the nature of his defence before or at the commencement of a trial · re-opening new evidence · nullifying an acquittal where there is evidence of jury or witness tampering · "with prejudice" appeals in the case of wrongful acquittal · extending alibi evidence rules to other analogous situations · allowing submissions by the prosecution before sentencing · modifying the rule in relation to hearsay evidence 5 … and any other proposals regarding criminal law, criminal evidence and criminal procedure that may come to the attention of the Group in the course of the review” On the 19th December 2006, the Tánaiste also requested the Review Group to consider the issue of admissibility of video evidence in circumstances where the accused person remains silent. The members of the Review Group are as follows: · Dr Gerard Hogan SC, Law School, Trinity College, Dublin (Chairman) · Barry Donoghue, Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions · Professor David Gwynn Morgan, Faculty of Law, University College, Cork · Dr Richard Humphreys, Barrister-at-Law · Tony McDermottroe, Assistant Secretary, Criminal Law Reform and Human Rights Divisions, Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform · Caitlín Ní Fhlaitheartaigh, Advisory Counsel, Office of the Attorney General · Ken O’Leary, Assistant Secretary, Crime, Mutual Assistance and Extradition Divisions, Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform · Nora Owen, Former Minister for Justice (1994-1997), member Commission for the Victims of Crime. 6 The Review Group would first wish to express its heartfelt thanks to the three members of its Secretariat: Ann Barry, Assistant Principal, Caroline Davin- Power, Executive Officer and Peter Jones, Assistant Principal, of the Criminal Law Reform Division of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. All three responded promptly to our requests for documentation and research and organised the meetings of the Group which were invariably held at short notice and out of ordinary office hours. The Chairman, with the complete assent of the other members of the Review Group, would particularly wish to register special recognition of the exceptional contribution of Dr. Richard Humphreys. The Review Group advertised for submissions and also had meetings with a number of interested parties including victims’ groups, members of the judiciary, senior members of An Garda Síochána, the Director of Public Prosecutions and Chief Prosecution Solicitor, journalists, representatives of the Human Rights Commission and legal practitioners. We list in Appendix 1 the persons we met or from whom written submissions were received. The Review Group also presented the Tánaiste on February 5, 2007 with an interim report containing provisional recommendations on the right to silence. Observations received on that interim report were taken into account in preparing this final report. 7 As stated above we should also emphasise that, given that the terms of reference of our review constrained us to report by 1st March 2007, we have taken the view that in certain cases, various issues drawn to our attention or considered by us warrant further study and we have sought to identify those issues later in this report. The context of the Review Group’s deliberations is the need to keep under review, in a changing society, legal rules that have developed over a long period of time. O’Higgins C.J. in Re Criminal Law (Jurisdiction) Bill 19751 speaking of the constitutional guarantee in Article 38.1 that no-one shall be tried save in due course of law, commented that the concept of due course of law requires: “a fair and just balance between the exercise of individual freedoms and the requirements of an ordered society.”2 In considering this proposition it must be recalled that individual freedoms are not the monopoly of the defendant and that the State also has a primary responsibility to vindicate the rights of the victim. The criminal law is a significant mechanism for vindicating those rights. At the same time, the criminal trial cannot simply be regarded as the equivalent of a civil action between a plaintiff victim and a defendant accused where the rights of 1 [1977] IR 129. 2 [1977] IR 129 at 152 8 both parties are absolutely equal. Certainly in the case of non-minor offences, the State has long since claimed a monopoly to prosecute such offences, in the words of Article 30.3 of the Constitution, “in the name of the People.” Moreover, given the profound implications for the liberty, reputation and livelihood of an accused charged with a serious offence, society has rightly ordained that an accused enjoy a series of special protections designed to ensure fairness and to guard against a possible miscarriage of justice. That, at any rate, is the theory of both the Constitution and the European Convention of Human Rights. The Review Group takes the view that the fundamental principles of our criminal justice system are sound, including the adversarial nature of the trials, the general rule of trial with a jury, the requirement that the burden must rest with the prosecution and the requirement that guilt be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The Review Group considers that these traditional fundamental features of the system are necessary and appropriate and would not wish to see these elements changed. Indeed the very fact that the system of jury trial is fundamental to our ordinary criminal law explains to a large extent many of the complexities in our criminal law, evidence and procedure. Other countries which do not have the tradition of jury trials have, in many respects, radically different laws of evidence, but 9 these systems are not a necessarily reliable guide as to how Irish law should develop. The Group feels that the fundamental rules of the Irish criminal justice system are working satisfactorily and, in any event, radical change to those fundamental rules is outside our remit.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Classified List of Acts in Force in Ireland Updated to 17 September 2021
    Classified List of Acts in Force in Ireland Updated to 17 September 2021 28. Oireachtas (National Parliament) and Legislation 28.1. Houses of the Oireachtas Service Public Exp1 Houses of the Oireachtas Commission Act 2003 28/2003 • Oireachtas (Ministerial and Parliamentary Offices) (Secretarial Facilities) (Banking Inquiry) Regulations 2014, S.I. No. 564 of 2014 • Oireachtas (Ministerial and Parliamentary Offices) (Secretarial Facilities) (Amendment) Regulations 2015, S.I. No. 164 of 2015 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2006 39/2006 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2009 44/2009 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 2012 50/2012 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2013 3/2013 • Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2013 (Commencement) Order 2013, S.I. No. 198 of 2013 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas (Appointments to Certain Offices) Act 2015 34/2015 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2015 53/2015 Public Exp Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2018 41/2018 28.2. Committees of the Oireachtas 28.2.1. Witnesses Public Exp Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Act 2013 2 33/2013 • Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Act 2013 (Commencement) Order 2013, S.I. No. 362 of 2013 Public Exp Comptroller and Auditor General and Committees of the Houses of the 47/1998 Oireachtas (Special Provisions) Act 1998 28.3. Legislation and Law Reform 28.3.1. Adaptation of Pre-1922 Charters Taoiseach Adaptation of Charters Act 1926 6/1926 • Saint Patrick’s Hospital, Dublin (Adaptation of Charters) Order 1926 [Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Oversight Group of Ireland's Second National Action Plan on Women
    Oversight Group of Ireland’s second National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security 2015 - 2018 Independent Chair 1. Nora Owen Nora was a member of Dáil Eireann (Lower House of Parliament) from 1981-1987 and 1989-2002. She has held several political positions over her 20 years in politics including Deputy Leader of Fine Gael Party in 1993 – 2000 and Minister for Justice from 1994-1997. Nora has spent time in Rwanda as a Volunteer with Concern in 1994 and has taken part in Parliamentary training in Africa Asia and Europe with NDI (USA) and AWEPA. Nora serves on the Board as Vice-Chair of Concern Worldwide. She holds a BSc in Chemistry and Biochemistry and a Business Law Certificate. Nora is currently Chair of Justice and Home Affairs committee of Institute of International and European Affairs, and Chair of the Expert Advisory Group on Development Aid reporting to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade. Nora has acted as TV Presenter in TV3 programs and presented Mastermind on TV3 as well as a commentator on several radio and TV programs. Government Departments/Statutory Bodies 2. Kevin Kelly Director, Conflict Resolution Unit, OSCE, Council of Europe and UN Co-ordination, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade Prior to his current role, Kevin was Director for Emergency & Recovery (Humanitarian Affairs) in the Development Cooperation Division of the Department. Previously he served as Ambassador to Uganda, also accredited to Rwanda, as Director for Africa in Political Division of the Department of Foreign Affairs, as Head of Development in the Embassy of Ireland in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and as Senior Governance Adviser for the World Bank in Addis Ababa.
    [Show full text]
  • Remote Court Hearings
    Oireachtas Library & Research Service | Bill Digest L&RS Note Remote Court Hearings Rebecca Halpin, Parliamentary Researcher, Law Abstract<xx> July 2020 28 July 2020 This L&RS Note considers the use of remote hearings in Ireland during the Covid-19 pandemic. The paper describes the way in which remote hearings have been introduced in Ireland and the type of matters in which they are used. The paper then considers the difficulties associated with remote hearings, the need for legislative reform, and circumstances in which remote hearings may be unsuitable. The L&RS gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Dr Rónán Kennedy, School of Law, NUI Galway in reviewing the contents of this Note in advance of publication. Oireachtas Library & Research Service | L&RS Note Contents Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Remote hearings – an overview ...................................................................................................... 3 ICT in Irish courts – capability and capacity .................................................................................... 4 Recent developments that facilitated the introduction of remote hearings .................................. 5 Impact and response to Covid-19 pandemic ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Papers of Gemma Hussey P179 Ucd Archives
    PAPERS OF GEMMA HUSSEY P179 UCD ARCHIVES [email protected] www.ucd.ie/archives T + 353 1 716 7555 © 2016 University College Dublin. All rights reserved ii CONTENTS CONTEXT Biographical History iv Archival History vi CONTENT AND STRUCTURE Scope and Content vii System of Arrangement ix CONDITIONS OF ACCESS AND USE Access xi Language xi Finding Aid xi DESCRIPTION CONTROL Archivist’s Note xi ALLIED MATERIALS Allied Collections in UCD Archives xi Published Material xi iii CONTEXT Biographical History Gemma Hussey nee Moran was born on 11 November 1938. She grew up in Bray, Co. Wicklow and was educated at the local Loreto school and by the Sacred Heart nuns in Mount Anville, Goatstown, Co. Dublin. She obtained an arts degree from University College Dublin and went on to run a successful language school along with her business partner Maureen Concannon from 1963 to 1974. She is married to Dermot (Derry) Hussey and has one son and two daughters. Gemma Hussey has a strong interest in arts and culture and in 1974 she was appointed to the board of the Abbey Theatre serving as a director until 1978. As a director Gemma Hussey was involved in the development of policy for the theatre as well as attending performances and reviewing scripts submitted by playwrights. In 1977 she became one of the directors of TEAM, (the Irish Theatre in Education Group) an initiative that emerged from the Young Abbey in September 1975 and founded by Joe Dowling. It was aimed at bringing theatre and theatre performance into the lives of children and young adults.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 an Taoiseach Enda Kenny TD Department of an Taoiseach
    An Taoiseach Enda Kenny TD Department of an Taoiseach Government Buildings Merrion Street Dublin 2 4 November 2014 RE: Law Enforcement Access to Data in the Irish Cloud Dear Taoiseach, As you know, the American Chamber of Commerce Ireland has close working relationships with the global American Chamber network. This network represents the interests of American multi-national companies across the world. The American Chamber of Commerce Ireland is one of the largest chambers in Europe as a result of the large base of American companies located in Ireland. These companies provide benefits, and economic growth in Europe, and several are technology companies that offer cloud-computing technology to European customers. Europeans can derive many benefits from widespread adoption of cloud computing technology. However, many Europeans may be hesitant to embrace cloud services because of lack of clarity about how their data is stored in remote data centres, many of which are located in Ireland. As a result of a number of matters that have been widely reported, such as the Snowden disclosures, European citizens have become more sensitive to ensuring respect for their right to privacy, including controls over how and to what extent data relating to them might be accessed by law enforcement authorities. The multijurisdictional dimension of cloud computing presents a number of legal challenges in this regard. This letter addresses one of the specific concerns - the extraterritorial reach of law enforcement authorities to access data in the context of routine criminal investigations. We believe that this concern can be effectively addressed by the Irish and US governments, to enhance the public’s trust while also increasing the effectiveness of law enforcement.
    [Show full text]
  • Bar Review April 01 25.04
    The BarJournal of the Bar of IrelandReview .Volume 10 . Issue 6 .December 2005 • A Comment on the Maritime Safety Act, 2005 • Barristers and Immunity from Suit • Delay in Sexual Offence Cases BarThe Review Volume 10,Issue 6, December 2005, ISSN 1339 - 3426 Contents 182 You Be the Judge Part II Jennifer Carroll Editorial Correspondence to: Eilis Brennan BL, 189 A Comment on the Maritime Safety Act, 2005. The Editor, Glen Gibbons BL Bar Review, Law Library, Four Courts, Dublin 7 193 Legal Update: DX 813154 A Guide to Legal Developments from Telephone: 353-1-817 5505 Fax: 353-1-872 0455 10th October 2005 up to 22nd November 2005. e-mail: [email protected] Editor: Eilis Brennan BL 209 A Bar to Recovery? Barristers, Public Policy, and Immunity from Suit Editorial Board: Paul Gallagher SC Ray Ryan BL and Des Ryan (Chairman, Editorial Board) 214 Clarifying The Law On Delayed Prosecutions For Sexual Offences Gerry Durcan SC Brian Conroy BL Mary O’Toole SC Patrick Dillon Malone BL 218 The Central Criminal Court - The Limerick Experience Conor Dignam BL Adele Murphy BL The Honourable Mr. Justice Paul Carney Brian Kennedy BL Vincent Browne BL Mark O’Connell BL Paul A. McDermott BL Tom O’Malley BL Patrick Leonard BL Paul McCarthy BL Des Mulhere The Bar Review is published by Thomson Round Hall in association with The Bar Council of Ireland. Jeanne McDonagh For all subscription queries contact: Jerry Carroll Thomson Round Hall Consultant Editors 43 Fitzwilliam Place, Dublin 2 Dermot Gleeson SC Telephone: + 353 1 662 5301 Fax: + 353 1 662 5302 Patrick MacEntee SC Email: [email protected] web: www.roundhall.ie Thomas McCann SC Subscriptions: January 2005 to December 2005 - 6 issues Eoghan Fitzsimons SC Annual Subscription: E188.00 Donal O’Donnell SC Annual Subscription + Bound Volume Service E288.00 Garrett Cooney SC Pat Hanratty SC For all advertising queries contact: Directories Unit.
    [Show full text]
  • Pro Bono Practices and Opportunities in the Republic of Ireland
    Pro Bono Practices and Opportunities in the Republic of Ireland INTRODUCTION The practice of pro bono is continuing to grow and develop in the Republic of Ireland (“Ireland”) and there are high levels of enthusiasm for pro bono opportunities among the legal profession. Nevertheless, there remains room for expansion in the provision of pro bono services, with Ireland arguably lagging behind several other comparable common law countries. OVERVIEW OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM Constitution and Governing Laws Ireland has a parliamentary democracy, with the President of Ireland elected directly by the people as its head of state,1 and is a common law jurisdiction, derived from the English legal system. Irish courts are bound by precedent.2 As a member of the European Union (the “EU”), Ireland’s legal system is also influenced significantly by EU law, with certain provisions having “direct effect” and thus being directly enforceable in Irish courts.3 The Courts Ireland has a tiered court structure with the Supreme Court at the top, serving as the court of final appeal in civil and criminal matters. Beneath the Supreme Court is the Court of Appeal,4 and then the High Court, Circuit Court (with appeals going to the High Court) and, at the bottom of the structure, the District Court. The courts have jurisdiction over all civil and criminal matters with the District Court dealing with the most minor civil and criminal cases.5 Some specialist matters, such as employment and social welfare cases, are dealt with by tribunals, which are similar to courts but aim to be less expensive and formal.6 Judges for all courts are appointed by the President of Ireland upon the recommendation of the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board (the “Board”).7 Persons seeking to be appointed as judges must apply to the Board, with the Board then making submissions to the Minister for Justice who, in turn, advises the 1 See http://www.president.ie/en/the-president/constitutional-role (last visited on September 4, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Visit to NUI Galway 4-6 March, 2019 Welcoming the Supreme Court to NUI Galway
    Supreme Court Visit to NUI Galway 4-6 March, 2019 Welcoming the Supreme Court to NUI Galway 4-6 March, 2019 Table of Contents Welcome from the Head of School . 2 Te School of Law at NUI Galway . 4 Te Supreme Court of Ireland . 6 Te Judges of the Supreme Court . 8 2 Welcome from the Head of School We are greatly honoured to host the historic sittings of the Irish Supreme Court at NUI Galway this spring. Tis is the frst time that the Supreme Court will sit outside of a courthouse since the Four Courts reopened in 1932, the frst time the court sits in Galway, and only its third time to sit outside of Dublin. To mark the importance of this occasion, we are running a series of events on campus for the public and for our students. I would like to thank the Chief Justice and members of the Supreme Court for participating in these events and for giving their time so generously. Dr Charles O’Mahony, Head of School, NUI Galway We are particularly grateful for the Supreme Court’s willingness to engage with our students. As one of Ireland’s leading Law Schools, our key focus is on the development of both critical thinking and adaptability in our future legal professionals. Tis includes the ability to engage in depth with the new legal challenges arising from social change, and to analyse and apply the law to developing legal problems. Te Supreme Court’s participation in student seminars on a wide range of current legal issues is not only deeply exciting for our students, but ofers them an excellent opportunity to appreciate at frst hand the importance of rigorous legal analysis, and the balance between 3 necessary judicial creativity and maintaining the rule of law.
    [Show full text]
  • JUSTICE MATTERS Independence, Accountability and the Irish Judiciary TANYA WARD
    JUSTICE MATTERS Independence, Accountability and the Irish Judiciary TANYA WARD 22473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio1473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio1 1 111/07/20071/07/2007 111:26:561:26:56 Th e Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) is Ireland’s leading independent human rights watchdog, which monitors, educates and campaigns in order to secure full enjoyment of human rights for everyone. ABOUT THE AUTHOR: TANYA WARD is Senior Research and Policy Offi cer with the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. 22473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio2473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio2 2 111/07/20071/07/2007 111:26:581:26:58 CONTENTS ABOUT THE ICCL 5 SECTION 4 Personal Independence and the Irish Judiciary 45 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 7 4.1 Introduction 46 4.2 Appointments 46 4.2.1 Selection and Criteria 46 SECTION 1 Introduction 9 4.2.2 Th e Judicial Advisory Appointments Board 1.1. Introduction 10 (JAAB) 50 1.2. Aims and Objectives of Study 12 4.3 Conditions of Service and Tenure 54 1.3. Methodology 13 4.4 Adequate Remuneration 56 1.4. Report Outline 14 4.5 Freedom of Expression and Association 57 4.5.1 Representation and Association 57 4.5.2 Extra-Judicial Comment and Educating SECTION 2 International Human Rights the Public 58 Standards on Judicial Independence and 4.6 Competence, Diligence and Judicial Studies 60 Impartiality 15 4.6.1 Judicial Studies in Ireland 60 2.1 Introduction 16 4.6.2 Induction 62 2.2 What is Judicial Independence? 16 4.6.3 Human Rights Education 63 2.3 What is Judicial Impartiality? 18 4.6.4 Further Academic Studies 65 2.4 International
    [Show full text]
  • Ar Aghaidh Le Cheile Unity Begins with You
    National Conference Ar Aghaidh Le Cheile Unity Begins with You 15th – 17th April 2021 #yfg21 Contents President’s Foreword National Executive Report Policy and Campaigns Committee Report Agricultural Group Report Coiste na Gaeilge International Committee Report Women’s Network Report National Executive Attendance Nominations for National Executive Steering Committee National Executive 2019 – 2021 Conference Itinerary Principles and Values Motions Resolutions Constitutional Amendments Standing Orders Project Officer for YFG Report Welcome from the President On behalf of the Young Fine Gael National Executive, I am delighted to welcome you to the 31st Young Fine Gael National Conference. This year’s Conference will be the first YFG National Conference in the organisation’s 44-year history to be held online, and I also hope that it will be the last. The pandemic has forced all of us in YFG to adapt quickly and dynamically to remain relevant and on this front, I believe we have succeeded. Our policies and campaigns have focussed on advocating for sensible, practical solutions to issues relevant to young people. We have sought to modernise Young Fine Gael through the relaunch of our website, the expansion of our social media presence to new platforms and a larger audience and the launch of the YFG Women’s Network, placing a renewed focus on the importance of greater female participation in politics. For the first time in its history, YFG was forced to run the entirety of its recruitment campaign online as Ireland went into lockdown. Despite the challenges we faced, our branches across the country can take pride in the fact that together, we delivered YFG’s first year-on-year increase in membership since 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Conference Programme (Please Note- This Event Will Be Conducted in English)
    In association with In cooperation with Increasing Capacity for Age-Friendly Environments in Europe: An Action Agenda for European Cities and Communities Conference Programme (Please note- this event will be conducted in English) Tuesday, October 25, 2016 11.45 to 12.15 Registration 12.15 to 13.00 Pre-conference lunch 13.15 to 13.50 Welcome and Introduction to conference Paul Reid Conn Murray Furio Honsell Chief Executive Chief Executive Mayor, Comune di Fingal County Limerick City and Udine Council County Council President of the European Covenant on Demographic Change Session 1 – Innovation for Convergence 13.50 to 15.00 Presentation: ‘’Aligning agendas within a crowded operating landscape’’, Dr. Stephanie O’Keeffe, National Director of Health and Wellbeing, HSE Panel discussion; Panel members to make a 3 minute opening statement ahead of moderated Q&A Questions & Answer Session (c. 35mins) Moderator: Speaker: Professor Geoff Green Dr. Stephanie O’Keeffe Emeritus Professor of Urban National Director of Health Policy Centre for Health & and Wellbeing, Health Social Care Research, Service Executive (HSE) Sheffield Hallam University Panel Members: Joan Martin Joan Devlin Furio Honsell Dr Alexander Peine Chief Executive, Chief Executive Mayor, Comune di Faculty of Geosciences, Louth County Council Belfast Healthy Cities Udine Utrecht University, Utrecht Innovation for Convergence: What are the links and synergies between ‘Age Friendly’, ‘Healthy’, ‘Smart’ and ‘Sustainable’ Cities? Can wider stakeholder coalitions be made and sustained to support effective focus on active and healthy ageing? How do we capitalise on these synergies and sustain the overlapping agendas simultaneously? Is there a danger that some groups may be prioritised at the expense of others In the pursuit of sustainable development and growth, many regions, cities, counties and municipalities are facing the challenge of how to achieve their social, economic and environmental goals in a balanced and integrated fashion.
    [Show full text]
  • Courts Service Ireland
    Response questionnaire project group Timeliness Courts' Service Ireland 1 The Court System and Available Statistics 1.1 The Court System The Irish justice system consists primarily of four tiers of courts; the District Court, the Circuit Court, the High Court and the Supreme Court. The District Court is the lowest court, having jurisdiction over minor civil and criminal matters. The civil jurisdiction does not exceed €6,348.69. For criminal matters the Court only hears minor offences. It only hears criminal cases where the maximum custodial sentence permitted upon conviction is 12 months or up to 2 years where a consecutive sentence is imposed. The District Court also has some jurisdiction in the family law area. Proceedings in Family Law are not heard in open court and are as informal as is practicable. The District Court also has wide powers in relation to liquor and lottery licensing. The Circuit Court has jurisdiction in most criminal jury trials and civil matters with a jurisdiction not exceeding €38,092.14. It also hears appeals from the District Court. The Circuit and High Court have concurrent jurisdiction in the area of Family Law. The Circuit Court has jurisdiction in a wide range of family law proceedings, (judicial separation, divorce, nullity and appeals from the District Court). The High Court has full and original jurisdiction in all matters and is the constitutional Court of first instance. In terms of its criminal jurisdiction, it sits as the Central Criminal Court and has jurisdiction over the most serious criminal trials, including those relating to murder, rape and serious sexual offences.
    [Show full text]