We use Google Analytics to see which pages are read and how the site is used, so we know what to improve. This only runs if you accept. See our privacy notice for details.

Dáil
‹ Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders' Questions

Bail fines and repeat offending

Summary

Deputy Grealish argued that offenders on bail are committing many crimes and that unpaid fines and free legal aid are undermining respect for the law. The Minister agreed people should pay fines, said there must be an effective system for collection, and noted rights under the ECHR.

I have raised various issues regarding law and order with several taoisigh and Ministers for Justice going back through the years. I have produced figures in this House showing how more than 32,000 crimes a year are being committed by offenders while out on bail, an increase of 41% on the total of ten years ago, and amounting to about 90 crimes every day of the year.

We are paying out more than €75 million a year on free legal aid in criminal cases, very often footing the bill for serial offenders with hundreds of previous convictions who do not have to make any contribution to their defence. Four out of five burglars released from prison in Ireland go on to reoffend within a short period, more than half of them within a year of their release. Overall, three out of five offenders released from custodial sentences reoffend within three years, most of them within the first 12 months.

Figures I have received from the Courts Service show that people are apparently ignoring fines imposed by the courts in respect of various breaches of the law. Currently, up to three quarters of the fines imposed by the courts in Ireland are going unpaid. Last year, more than €15 million of the €20 million plus in fines imposed was not paid, and the total value of unpaid fines over the past five years amounts to more than €48 million. That is from the Courts Service.

So far this year, more than 43,000 of the 60,000 plus fines imposed by the courts during 2023 are still outstanding. A total value of more than €15.2 million remains unpaid. Many of these fines were imposed in respect of serious offences and were obviously intended to act as a deterrent against further breaches of the law. However, the figures I have received show that most people simply ignore them. For instance, there were more than 5,700 fines imposed last year on people convicted of public order offences but only about 1,300 of them were paid. In the past five years, a total of 144,000 fines have gone unpaid. In that period, enforcement sanctions were only imposed on 3,300 offenders. These are figures the Courts Service supplied to me earlier this year.

With over €48 million outstanding in fines for the past five years, what does the Government propose to do to recoup that money?

Comment on this

I thank the Deputy. The point he makes is absolutely correct. There are a lot of fines outstanding there that have not been paid. If a person is due to pay a fine, I think he or she should be paying it. If the person does not pay it, the route is back into court again, as I understand it. Then we will be faced with situations where people who did not pay maybe relatively small fines have been brought back into the courts and may face a custodial sentence. The Deputy knows himself what happens then, and sometimes there is a lot of concern about that.

I agree that we need an effective, efficient and robust criminal legal system. The Department of Justice is currently working to reform how criminal legal aid works. As part of this work, the Minister has published the general scheme of the criminal justice (legal aid) Bill 2023. This Bill will outline the operation of the criminal legal aid scheme. It will introduce strengthened oversight and governance structures, and I can confirm to the Deputy that the general scheme is currently with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel for drafting.

It is important that proper assessments are carried out when deciding if a person can qualify for criminal legal aid, and that is why this new legislation will allow the courts, where the courts might consider it warranted, to refer an applicant to the Legal Aid Board for an assessment of their financial circumstances to be carried out under regulations to be drawn up under the terms of the Bill. The board will then be able to recommend that a person can afford to contribute to their legal costs, rather than having the entire bill borne by the taxpayer. A court will make the final decision in the matter. However, I am informed that to restrict access to criminal legal aid for repeat offenders would be found to be unconstitutional. Any unreasonable block on legal aid could give a convicted person an avenue for appeal and delay the outcome of the case even further. To do so would run contrary to the protection of our democracy and the rule of law.

It is important for me to emphasise that the law in respect of bail is comprehensive and has been strengthened on a number of occasions over the years, most recently in 2017. The Department of Justice is currently working on the modernisation of criminal legal aid and will continue to engage with all relevant stakeholders, including the legal profession, on the modernisation and funding of the legal aid system.

I take the point the Deputy has raised. It is concerning when people do not pay their fines. I will raise the matter again with the Minister. It is a bit of a bugbear for many. When people are fined, that is the penalty and they should pay their fines.

Comment on this

Many people refusing to pay fines could be repeat offenders who have no respect whatsoever for the law. I am sure it is frustrating for An Garda Síochána, which carries out investigations and brings offenders to court, only for them to get off scot-free without paying fines or being punished for their crimes. We have to show the law-abiding citizens of our country that people who go before the courts and are fined are made to pay. Whether that is a payment or deduction from their social welfare or wages, they must be made to pay for their crimes. In the Minister's Department, if people are overpaid on their social welfare payment or pension, an investigation happens and if it is found to have been wrongly paid, then the money is deducted from their future payments. Every person has a PPS number. I am sure many people who go before the courts are either getting wages or a social welfare payment. If they do not pay the fine, after a period of six months, it should be deducted from their social welfare or salary. Hit them where it hurts, because if they do not pay the fine, they will keep reoffending. What measures does the Government propose to make sure that people who commit often serious offences are made to pay for their crimes?

Comment on this

I agree with the Deputy that people should absolutely pay the fines that are imposed on them. If they do not pay, there should be some way of deducting it. The Deputy is right. If they do not pay the fines, they could be brought back into court again, because if they do not comply with the ruling of the court, that is an offence. I have to say that they do have certain rights. Repeat offenders have certain rights too even though it can be frustrating to see them appearing time and time again and getting free legal aid. I fully understand that. The European Convention on Human Rights provides that every person charged with a criminal offence is entitled to defend themselves in person or through legal assistance of their own choosing, or if they have insufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it for free when the interests of justice so require.

As mentioned, the criminal legal aid scheme was to operate with due regard to these rights. Any unreasonable block to legal aid could give a convicted defendant an avenue for appeal or prohibition of the prosecution. I absolutely take on board what the Deputy is saying and I will raise the matter again with the Minister for Justice. It is only right and proper, if a fine is imposed, that people pay the fine and pay their dues back to society for whatever reason it was imposed.

Comment on this