asked the Minister for Justice the reasons he has been unable to reduce the three-and-a-half year prison sentences in three cases (details supplied) for robbery of £57; if he is aware of the widespread dissatisfaction within the Ballyfermot area caused by the sentences; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

It has never been the practice to give reasons for decisions to refuse any particular petitions.

Are not the facts that the accused were found guilty on appeal of stealing £57 during which action there was very slight bodily injury to one person——

It is not in order to recount the particulars of individual cases.

There were no previous convictions in respect of these persons in the previous six or seven years.

If the Chair permitted Deputies to raise those sort of questions every case dealt with in the courts might be queried at Question Time.

This is an exceptional case.

There is not any exception.

With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle I propose to raise on the Adjournment the subject matter of Questions No. 14, 15 and 16.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

Is the Minister aware of the difficulty that exists in respect of people who may have a sense of grievance as a result of court decisions and in respect of whom presumably there is occasion for the grievance in some instances? In view of the independence of the Judiciary, with which we all agree, would the Minister give consideration to some system that would allow for the expression of grievances, such as in the case being put forward now, which apparently has led to a certain amount of disquiet? Would it be possible that individual cases of that type could be handled by the Department or by some authority on behalf of people who have no one else to speak for them? Apparently they are debarred from having their cases raised in this House.

The Deputy might table a separate question in that regard.

If a Minister for Justice were to undertake to defend his refusal to interfere with a court decision, he would be called on to do so for all of the thousands of sentences imposed by the courts.

I am thinking of cases in respect of which there is a strong sense of grievance.

Having seen the file of the case in question I am convinced that the three-and-a-half year sentence was totally unjustified.

The persons concerned were convicted by the Central Criminal Court and the sentences were affirmed by the Court of Criminal Appeal.

Is the Minister prepared to confirm the details I have given—that the amount stolen was £57, that there was very slight bodily injury caused and that the persons concerned did not have previous convictions?

Would the Deputy please desist from citing individual cases?

I have told the Deputy that it has never been the practice to give reasons for decisions.

Only a few months ago a murder charge was awarded with a sentence of one year. What sort of justice was that?

We must move on to the next question.