IRELAND

IRELAND
INTRODUCTION
Legal system
1. Ireland is a common law jurisdiction. The justice system in Ireland is predicated upon
an adversarial paradigm whereby the judge is denied any active involvement in the
elucidation of evidence. Criminal trials take the form of a contest between the
prosecution and the defence. The judge is expected to ensure the observance of
procedural rectitude by the parties in their contest while the jury is expected to
consider the merits of the respective cases and articulate a res ult in the form of a
verdict.
2. Within this dynamic it is widely accepted that the role of defence counsel is to put
the prosecution on proof of its case and to seek by every equitable mean to secure an
acquittal for an accused. By contrast, the prosecution ’s aim is, not to secure a
conviction at all costs but to present an impartial and full account of any admissible
evidence including making disclosure to the defence of any information which may
strengthen the exculpatory case. In Paul Ward v Special Criminal Court, 1 O’Flaherty J.
declared that the task of the prosecution “is not to secure a conviction: rather they
always must be ministers of justice”. 2
3. Article 38.3.5 of the Irish Constitution (‘Bunreacht na hÉireann) provides that with
the exception of (i) the trial of minor offences, (ii) the proceedings of military
tribunals and (iii) the proceedings of special courts establi shed to trial offences which
the are beyond the capabilities of ordinary courts (i.e. special criminal courts), “ no
person shall be tried on any criminal charge without a jury. ” In responding to this
final exception to the right to trial by jury, the legislature passed the Offences
Against State Act 1939 which led to the establishment of the Special Criminal Court. 3
1
[1998] 2 ILRM 493
[1998] 2 ILRM 493 at 505.
3
Offences Against the State Act 1939, s 35(2). This section provides the legislative framework for the Special
Criminal Court, provides as follows: “If and whenever and so often as the Government is satisfied that the
ordinary courts are inadequate to secure the effective administration of justice and the preservation of public
peace and order and that it is therefore necessary that this Part of this Act should come into force, the
Government may make and publish a proclamation declaring that the Government is satisfied as aforesaid and
ordering that this Part of this Act shall come into force.” 137
2
4.
Thus, in Ireland four law courts have original jurisdiction in criminal matters: the
District Court, the Circuit Court, the Central Criminal Court and the Special Criminal
Court. Summary trials are held in the District Court in the absence of a jury. Trials
on indictment, meanwhile, are held in the Circuit Court and Central Criminal Court
respectively before both a judge and jury. Finally, trials in the Special Criminal Court
take place in the absence of a jury. According to section 39(1) of 1939 Act t here must
be an uneven number, and a mimimum of three, judges in the court at all times.
5. The police force in Ireland is an Garda Síochána and public prosecutions are
sustained by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (‘DPP’).
6. Ireland has not yet formally implemented Directive 2012/29/EU of The European
Parliament and of The Council of 25 October 2012 Establishing Minimum Standards On The
Rights, Support And Protection Of Victims Of Crime, And Replacing Council Framework
Decision 2001/220/JHA (‘Victims’ Directive’) 4 . The deadline for implementaiton of
the Victims’ Directive is 16 November 2015. It is antcipated that implementation of
the Victim’s Directive will result in substantial amendments to Ireland’s subsiting law
on the treatment of AVs. 5
7. In a recent speech 6 by Ms. Frances Fitzgerald T.D., Minister for Justice and Equality ,
the Minister confirmed that work on the necessary legislation to transpose the
directive, the Victims Bill, is ongoing and that the aim of the Department of Justice
is to have legislation implementing the Victims’ Directive enacted by the due date of
16th November, 2015.
Definition of Victim
8. There is no statutory definition of victim in Irish law.
9. The EU Framework Decision on the Standing of Victims in Criminal Proceedings
(2001) defines a as “a natural person who has suffered harm, including physical or
mental injury, emotional suffering or economic loss, directly caused by acts or
4
Directive 2012/29/EU of The European Parliament and of The Council of 25 October 2012 Establishing
Minimum Standards On The Rights, Support And Protection Of Victims Of Crime, And Replacing Council
Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA [2012] OJL 315
5
For a detailed discussion on the reformative implications of the Victims’ Directive see Matthew Holmes, ‘The
impact of the proposed Victims Rights Directive on the Criminal Justice System’ Bar Review 17(4), (2012) 8082.
6
Department Of Justice And Equality, ‘Speech by Ms. Frances Fitzgerald T.D., Minister for Justice and
Equality, at the Victims Rights Alliance Conference, in the Pillar Room, Rotunda Hospital, Dublin on Friday,
14 November, 2014’, available at: < http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/SP14000323> accessed 26 March
2015.
omissions that are in violation of the crim inal law of a Member State.” 7
This
definition has been included in the Victims Charter.
Private Prosecutions
10. Private Prosecutions can only be invoked for the prosecution of summary offences.
Section 9(1) of the Criminal Justice (Administration) Act 1924 expressly provides
that “All criminal charges prosecuted upon indictment in any court shall be prosecuted
at the suit of the Attorney-General of Saorstát Eireann”. Thus, in cases involving a
prosecution on indictment, a private individual is only entitled to initiate and pursue
proceedings up to the point at which a decision is made on whether or not to
formally send an accused forward to trial. Once the applicant is sent for trial, the
Director of Public Prosecution (formerly the Attorney General) becomes dominus litis.
This statutory framework for private proseuctions is se t out in more detail in section
(c) below.
7
2001/220/JHA: Council Framework Decision of 15 March 2001 on the standing of victims in criminal
proceedings [2001] OJL 82/1, art 1
QUESTION 1: IN LIGHT OF RELEVANT LEGISLATION, CASE LAW
AND POLICY DOCUMENTS, DOES YOUR JURISDICTION PROVIDE
FOR VICTIM PARTICIPATION IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS FOR
ALL ALLEGED VICTIMS IN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING FORMS?
Introductory Remarks
11. The DPP prosecutes cases, in the public interest, on behalf of the p eople of Ireland
and not merely in the interests of any one individual. To this end, while the views
and interests of an alleged victim (‘AV’) are important, they are not the only factor
considered by the Office when deciding whether or not to prosecute. The Office has,
however, given an undertaking in the Victim s Charter to take into account the
consequences of a prosecutorial determination for an AV to consider any views
expressed by the AV or his or her family. The Victims Charter however is for
guidance purposes only and the commitments therein contained are not legally
enforceable by victims.
12. Only an AV, a family member of an AV, an accused person, a family member of an
accused person (as defined in section 6(2)(b) of the Prosecution of Offences Act
1974), lawyers, doctors and social workers are entitled to contact the DPP to inquire
about a particular case. 8 This communication must be carried out in writing as the
staff of the DPP do not discuss decisions in person.
13. It is against the law for anybody else to contact the Office of the DPP for the
purpose of influencing a decision to withdraw or not to start a prosecution or for the
purpose of influencing the making of a decision to review a sentence (pursuant to
section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, discussed below at paragraph).
Duty to Investigate
14. It is well established in Irish law that members of an Garda Síochána are not under a
legal duty to investigate every complaint and, as such, the gardaí enjoy a large
measure of discretion in deciding whether to conduct a pre-trial investigation. In this
regard, members of the gardaí are not obliged to consider the views of an AV. In
Fowley v Conroy [2005] 3 IR 480, which remains the seminal Irish authority on this
issue, Clarke J. ruled that the courts would only intervene in a decision by an Garda
8
The Prosecution of Offences Act 1974, s 6.
Síochána to investigate a crime in the “most exceptional cases”. According to Clarke
J. “the gardaí must enjoy a wide margin of appreciation indeed as to the manner in
which the inquiry is conducted and only in the most exceptional cases could t he court
have jurisdiction to intervene”.
15. Notwithstanding the absence of a legal requirement on an Garda Síochána to
investigate a complaint, the gardaí nevertheless give an undertaking in section 2 of
the Victims Charter to investigate the complaint of an AV.
Complaints Procedure
16. Any AV aggrieved by a decision of a member of an Garda S íochána is entitled to
lodge a formal complaint with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission
(‘Ombudsman’). The Ombudsman is a statut ory body established under the Garda
Síochána Act 2005 for the purpose of receiving, investigating and responding to
complaints by members of the public concerning the conduct o f members of an
Garda Síochána. 9 There is no legal requirement on an AV to lodge such a formal
complaint.
(a)
Are there provisions for support services (including counselling, use of
Interpreter, interim compensation and other measures) at the time of complaint?
17. At present there is no centralised support service available to AVs in Ireland to assist
them at the time of making a complaint. The victim support services which currently
exist in Ireland have evolved in an incremental and independent manner over the past
thirty years without any considered or unified approach. Accordingly the victim
service network currently operating in Ireland is densely populated by an array of
disparate bodies offering similar services- none of which have been formally
established on a statutory basis.
18. Victim support organisations currently operating in Ireland include the following: (i)
AdVIC
9
10
(ii) Amen
11
(iii) National Crime Victims’ Helpline
The Garda Síochána Act 2005, part III.
http://www.advic.ie
11
http://www.amen.ie/index.html
12
http://crimevictimshelpline.ie
10
12
(iv) Rape Crisis
Network 13 (v) Support After Homicide 14 (vi) Irish Tourist Assistant Service 15 (vii) One
in Four 16 and (ix) Sexual Violence Centre Cork 17.
19. In an attempt to bring a sense of unity to this heterogeneous service network, the
Commission for the Support of Victims of Crime (the ‘Commission’) was established
in March 2005 by the then Minister for Justice and Equality to provide funding for
services which support AVs. The Commission also works to improve the cohesion
and consistency of the services and information available to AVs. The Commission is
an independent body which operates under the aegis of the Department of Justice
and Equality.
20. The Commission is supported by the Victims of Crime Of fice (the ‘Office’) -a full
time executive office established in 2008 for purpose of supporting AVs. The Office
works to ensure a co-ordinated policy response to issues affecting AVs and it
provides the secretariat to the Commission. The Office also maintains Departmental
oversight of the Charter and its implementation.
21. The following national helplines have been funded by the Commission (with the
approval of the Office) in order to provide support and advice to AVs at the time of
making a complaint:

Amen- Provides court accompaniment services, a confidential helpline,
support services and information for men who have or are experiencing
domestic violence;



13
Crime Victims Helpline- A national helpline which is there to listen, inform and where
relevant, to refer people to support services in their local area for victims of crime. In
section 1 of the Victims Charter, The Crime Victims Helpline expressly undertake to
inform an AV about the support services which exist in his or her locality.
Dublin Rape Crisis Centre- A national organisation offering a wide range of services to
women and men who are affected by rape, sexual assault, sexual harassment or childhood
sexual abuse. The services include a national 24-hour helpline, one to one counselling, court
accompaniment, outreach services, training, awareness raising and lobbying.
Woman’s Aid Dublin- provides a National Freephone Helpline and the support services
team offers a one-to-one information and support service, as well as a court
accompaniment service, providing advocacy and support to the particular needs of the
woman seeking legal redress. This organisation also has an interpreter service available
covering 170 languages.
http://www.rcni.ie/
www.supportafterhomicid.ie
15
http://itas.ie/
16
http://www.oneinfour.ie/
17
http://www.sexualviolence.ie/
14
22. The following national counselling services have been funded by the Commission
(with the approval of the Office) in order to provide support to AVs at the time of
making a complaint:

AdVIC (Advocates for Victims of Homicide) - Campaigns for greater rights
for victims of homicide, their families and friends and brings together families
bereaved by homicide including those affected by murder, manslaughter and
fatal assault. Provides access to subsidised counselling.

Barnardos- Provides counselling and therapy to children affected by homicide and
supports children whose well-being is under threat, by working with them, their families
and communities and by campaigning for the rights of children.


CARI- Provides court accompaniment services and therapy for children and adolescents
affected by the issue of sexual abuse and support for the non-abusing family membercarers. Also provides a helpline.
Dublin Rape Crisis Centre- A national organisation offering a wide range of services to
women and men who are affected by rape, sexual assault, sexual harassment or childhood
sexual abuse. The services include a national 24-hour helpline, one to one counselling, court
accompaniment, outreach services, training, awareness raising and lobbying.
23. In the section 2 of the Victims Charter, the gardaí undertake to explain to AVs the
steps involve in a criminal investigation, keep them informed of the criminal
investigation and inform them in writing about the Crime Victims’ Helpline and
other services available for AVs. This Charter is not legally enforceable and is for
guidance purposes only.
24. The Garda Victim Liaison Office (GVLO) is responsi ble for supporting the
implementation of the Garda Síochána’s Victims Charter. In addition, GVLO
provides support to Family Liaison Officers (FLOs) who are appointed to AVs and
their families in serious cases such as murde r or false imprisonments. The principal
role of the FLO is to keep AVs informed during the investigation and to provide
victim support information.
(b)
Are there provisions for witness protection during the investigation?
25. By way of background comment, it should be noted that Irish courts have
traditonally been opposed to granting either anonymity or pseudonymity to witnesses
in criminal proceedings except where the law expressly so requires . This reluctance is
attributable to Article 34 of the Constitution which provides that “Justice shall be
administered in courts established by law by judges appointed in the manner provided
by this Constitution, and, save in such special and limited cases as may be prescribed
by law, shall be administered in public.” 18
26. The first recorded Irish case involving testimony from a witness on a Witness
Protection Programme was DPP v Gilligan where the admissibility of evidence
obtained from witnesses in the programme was confirmed . 19 The legal permissiblity
of this programme was subsequently confirmed by the Supreme Court, on appeal . 20
27. The Witness Protection Programme (or Witness Security Programme) is operated by
the Garda Síochána for the purpose of ensuring that the course of justice is not
perverted by those who, through violence or threats of violence, seek to suppress
vital evidence in a trial through the intimidation of witnesses, whether by threatening
or harming witnesses prior to testifying, or by threatening retribution afterwards.
28. Section 40 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999 established t he Witness Protection
Programme on a formal statutory basis. Section 40 provides that it an offence for any
person, without lawful authority, to try to ident ify the whereabouts or any new
identity of a witness who has been relocated under the programme. The maximum
penalty for an offence under the section is five years imprisonment or a fine, or both.
29. In addition to the formal protection afforded by the State’ s Witness Protection
Programme, section 7 of the Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981 grants anonymity to AVs
of sexual assault. Specifically, this provision provides that once a person is charged
with a sexual assault offence, nothing likely to lead to the identi fication of the AV
shall be published without the court’s permission.
30. Similarly section 11 of the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008 criminalises
the publication of the identity of AVs of human trafficking.
31. In relation to cases involving child witnesses, section 252 of the Children Act 2001
expressly prohibits the publication of the identity of a child AVs or child witnesses.
(c)
Are the alleged victims consulted while deciding whether to prosecute? Are
private prosecutions allowed?
Decisions to Prosecute:
32. There is no legal requirement on the DPP to consult with an AV in making a
prosecutorial determination. Irish caselaw has confirmed that the DPP enjoys a very
18
Bunreacht na hÉireann, art 34.
DPP v Gilligan (unreported, Court of Criminal Appeal, August 8, 2003).
20
DPP v Gilligan [2006] I IR. 107.
19
wide discretion in the exercise of his prosecutorial functions. 21 Thus, while decisions
of the DPP are, in theory, judicially reviewable, such a review will only be acceded to
on very limited grounds where it can be shown that the Director acted in bad faith or
in pursuit of an improper motive or policy. 22
33. Notwithstanding the absence of a legal obligation to consult with an AV, the Office
of the DPP nevertheless undertakes in section 4 of the Victims Charter, to consider
the views of an AV when deciding whether or not to prosecute. The Victims Charter
however is for guidance purposes only and the commitments therein contained are
not legally enforceable by victims. As noted above, the views of an AV must be
communicated through written correspndence as the staff of the Director’s Office do
not meet victims of crime to discuss decisions.
34. In addition, the Office undertakes to reconsider a prosecutorial decision which it has
made if an AV expresses his or her disagreement with that decision. The Director is
required to apply fair procedures in the exercise of this review process. It was
established in the Supreme Court case of Eviston v. Director of Public Prosecutions (31
July 2002) that the Director is entitled to review an earlier decision not to prosecute
and to arrive at a different decision even in the absence of new evidence.
35. When the DPP decides not to prosecute in a particular case, the reasons for the
decisions are given to the local State Solicitor and the investigating Garda only. The
Office does not to disclose this information to the AV or to the public. 23 However,
AVs may write to the Office if there is a point they wish to make about a particular
decision.
21
See State (McCormack) v Curran [1987] ILRM 225 (S.C.), H v The Director of Public Prosecutions and The
Commissioner of the Garda Síochána [1994] 2 IR 589 and Eviston v DPP [2002] 3 I.R.260.
22
In Eviston v DPP [2002] 3 IR 260, Keane C.J., having cited the cases of McCormack and H respectively,
summarized the law in Ireland as follows: “[I]n each case, the court was concerned with (a) a decision not to
prosecute in a particular case and (b) a challenge to the merits of that decision. The decisions, accordingly, go
no further than saying that the courts will not interfere with the decision of the respondent not to prosecute
where (a) no prima facie case of mala fides has been made out against the respondent; (b) there is no evidence
from which it could be inferred that he has abdicated his functions or been improperly motivated; and (c) the
facts of the case do not exclude the reasonable possibility of a proper and valid decision of the respondent not to
prosecute the person concerned. They also make it clear that, in such circumstances, the respondent cannot be
called upon to explain his decision or to give the reasons for it or the sources of the information upon which it is
based.”
23
This policy of non-disclosure has been upheld by the Supreme Court in H v. Director of Public Prosecutions
[1994] 2 IR 589 at 603 where O’Flaerty J. stated as follows: “The stance taken by the Director of Public
Prosecutions is that he should not, in general, give reasons in any individual case as to why he has not brought a
prosecution because if he does so in one case he must be expected to do so in all cases. I would uphold this
position as being a correct one.” In addition, the appropriateness of this policy was confirmed by the Select
Committee on Crime, Lawlessness and Vandalism (15th Report, Pl 4703 at paragraph 3.7).
36. An exception to the above rule exists however in relation to cases involving a
deceased victim. In such circumstances the DPP undertakes to provide the deceased’s
family members with the reason, whenever possible, behind the Office’s decision not
to maintain a prosecution. It should be noted however that this policy only applies to
cases where the death of the victim took place on or after 22 October 2008.
37. The Freedom of Information Act, 1997 provides a right of access to records
concerning the general administration of the Office only. 24 This means that under the
Act there is no right of access for AVs to information from files relating to their
individual criminal cases.
38. In addition to considering the views of an AV, the DPP makes an express
commitment in section 4 of the Victims Charter to ensuring that an AV is kept fully
informed of developments in relation to the prosecution of offences (especially those
of a violent or sexual nature), to treating an AV with respect and to take account of
his or her personal situation, rights and dignity
and to facilitating a pre-trial
meeting between the AV and the solicitor and counsel dealing with the case to
discuss the case. 25
Private Prosecutions
39. At common law it was permissible for a private individual to initiate a criminal
prosecution as a “common informer” notwithstanding the fact that he or she had no
personal or pecuniary interest in the matter. It was held in Wedwick v Osmond & Son 26
that this common law right had survived the enactment of the Irish Constitution.
More recently, the Supreme Court, in the State (Collins) v. Ruane 27 confirmed the
continued legitimacy of this common informer mechanism .
40. The exercise of this right, however, is subject to one clear limitation, namely that the
“common informer” mechanism can only be invoked for the prosecution of summary
offences. The Criminal Justice (Administration) Act 1924 expressly provides that “ All
criminal charges prosecuted upon indictment in any court shall be prosecuted at the
suit of the Attorney-General of Saorstát Eireann”.
24
28
Thus, in cases involving a
The Freedom of Information Act 1997, s 46(1)(b).
The purpose of such a meeting is to explain the trial process to the victim and answer any questions he or she
may have. Solicitor and counsel do not discuss evidence with witnesses in advance of a case. There are strict
rules which prevent barristers discussing in advance the actual evidence that victims will give. This is intended
to prevent the witness being told what evidence to give or to avoid any suggestion that this has happened.
26
[1935] IR 820
27
[1984] IR 105
28
The Criminal Justice (Administration) Act 1924, s 9(1).
25
prosecution on indictment, a private in dividual is only entitled to initiate and pursue
proceedings up to the point at which a decision is made on whether or not to
formally send an accused forward to trial. Once the applicant is sent for trial, the
Director of Public Prosecution (formerly the Attorney General) becomes dominus
litis and the notice party, who must be regarded as having initiated the proceedings in
the capacity of private prosecutor, must yield place to him. 29
41. Section 4(A)(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1967 as inserted by section 9 of the
Criminal Justice Act 1999 expressly provides that a person will not be sent forward
for trial without the consent of the DPP. As such where the DPP refuses consent in
relation to the prosecution of an indictable offe nce, the privately initiated
proceedings must be struck out. However the strike -out shall not prejudice the
institution of further proceedings against the accused by the DPP. 30
(d)
What are the rights available to the alleged victims in relation to the trial?
Pre-Trial Investigation
42. As noted above, a mechanism for private prosecution continues to be recognised in
Irish law. In circumstances where an AV opts to initate a private prosecution as a
‘common informer’, he or she will have full autonomy in designing the investigation.
It should, however, be noted that the investigatory jurisidiction of an AV in
sustaining a private prosecution is markedly restricted and he or she is deprived of
the wide statutory powers of investigation afforded to members of an G arda
Síochána. 31
43. In relation to formal public prosecutions meanwhile, it is well established in Irish law
that members of an Garda Síochána enjoy a large measure of discretion in conducting
the pre-trial investigation. In this regard, members of the gardaí are not obliged to
consider the views of an AV. In Fowley v Conroy 32 , which remains the seminal Irish
authority on this issue, Clarke J. ruled that the courts would only intervene in a
decision by an garda síochána to investigate a crime in the “most exceptional cases”.
29
See Cummann Lúthcleas Gael Teoranta v Windle [1994] 1 IR 525 at 533.
The Criminal Procedure Act 1967, s 4(A)(4) as inserted by the Criminal Justice Act 1999, s 9.
31
For a good example of the evidential difficulties faced by a private individual in sustaining a private
prosecution see H v The Director of Public Prosecutions and The Commissioner of the Garda Síochána,
Respondents [1994] 2 IR 589. In this case the Supreme Court confirmed, inter alia, that, in the absence of mal
fides on the part of the Director of Public Prosecutions, he could not be compelled to supply a private prosecutor
with any statements taken by the gardai or other relevant documentation in his possession to enable the private
indivudal to pursue an independent prosecution.
32
[2005] 3 IR 480
30
According to Clarke J. “the gardaí must enjoy a wide margin of appreciation indeed
as to the manner in which the inquiry is conducted and only in the most exceptional
cases could the court have juris diction to intervene”.
44. Notwithstanding the absence of a legal requirement on an Garda Síochána to
investigate a complaint, the gardaí nevertheless give an undertaking in section 2 of
the Victims Charter to investigate the complaint of an AV.
Pre-Trial Detention
45. AVs have no legal right to contribute to determinations concerning pre -trial
detention (‘bail’). In Ireland decisions to grant bail can be made by both the police
and the courts.
46. An Garda Síochána operate a system of ‘station bail’ pursuant to sec tion 31 of the
Criminal Procedure Act 1967, as amended. 33 Under this provision a sergeant in an
Garda Síochána or a member in charge may, if he considers it prudent to do so,
release a person brought to a station in custody on bail provided there us no warr ant
in force directing his detention. There is no statutory requirement on the deciding
Garda to consider the interests of the AV.
47. Court applications for bail are governed by section 2 of the Bail Act 1997 which
provides that a judge may refuse to grant bail if he or she is “satisfied that such
refusal is reasonably considered necessary to prevent the commission of a serious
offence by that person”. Section 2(2) sets out a non-exhaustive list of factors which a
court must take into account when exercising i ts jurisdiction to refuse bail. The
statute does not require the court to give any consi deration to the interests of an AV.
48. In Maguire v DPP 34 it was confirmed by the Supreme Court that the factors listed in
section 2 of the Bail Act 1997 are not exhaustive . However there is, as yet, no
recorded judgment evidencing consideration of the in terests of an AV in a section 2
bail determination.
49. It should be noted, for the sake of completeness, that section 6(1) of the Bail Act
1997 stipulates a number of conditions which a trial judge can impose on an order
for bail, including “(v) that the accused person refrains from having any contact with
such person or persons as the court may specify ”. This can include the AV.
33
34
By the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1997, s 3 and the Criminal Justice Act 2007, s 20.
[2004] 3 IR 241
50. In section 2 of the Victims Charter, the Garda Síocána give an undertaking to inform
AVs about whether an accused has been granted bail and any conditions of such bail.
Rights at Trial
51. AVs in Ireland enjoy very few legally enforceable rights during a criminal
investigation. As discussed, the DPP prosecutes cases in Ireland in the public interest
and not merely in the interests of any one individual. As such, AVs do not have a
legal right to access casefiles or to be provided with updates in relation to an
investigation or trial proceeding.
52. While AVs may not be formally entitled to a legal right of information on
proceedings, the DPP has nevertheless made a commitment to all AVs in section 4 of
the Victims Charter to treat AVs with respect and to work with the Gardaí to make
sure that AVs are kept up to date on a case.
53. In addition the Courts Service give a commitment in section 3 of the Victims Charter
to “provide a courteous, fair and sensitive service to victims of crime. ” Some of the
measures which the Courts Service have introduced to support victims at trial
include: (i) the creation of victim waiting rooms, (ii) the creation of a dedicated
victim suite within the Criminal Courts of Justice in Dublin, (iii) the introduction of
video link facilities in courtrooms (it should be noted that these facilities can only be
invoked in very limited circumstances as set out in paragraph 91 below) , (iv) the
facilitation of pre-trial visits and (v) the introduction of a customer liaison office.
Right to Legal Representation
54. In most cases an AV is not entitled to independent legal representation in the
courtroom.
55. However section 4A of the Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981, as inserted by section 34
of the Sex Offenders Act 2001, as amended, provides an exception to the rule against
victim legal representation at trial. 35 According to this provision an AV is entitled to
separate legal representation where an accused applies to the court for leave to
adduce evidence of an AV’s prior sexual history. This right only arises in relation to
certain specified sexual offences. 36
35
By the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) (Amendment) Act 2007, s 3 and by section the Criminal Law (Sexual
Offences) Act 2006, s 6(2).
36
According to s 4A(6) of the Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981, as amended, the right to separate represetnation
arises in relation to “a rape offence and any of the following, namely, aggravated sexual assault, attempted
aggravated sexual assault, aiding, abetting, counselling and procuring aggravated sexual assault or attempted
56. Section 28 of the Civil Legal Aid Act 1995, as amended by section 35 of the Sex
Offenders Act 2001, provides that an AV shall be entitled to legal aid for the
purposes of securing legal representation in relation to such applications.
Right to Legal Advice
57. The Civil Legal Aid Act 1995 makes provision for free means -tested legal advice for
AVs of certain specified sexual offences. 37 It is important to note that this provision
strictly provides for a right to advice, not to representation.
Right to deliver opening and closing statement:
58. AVs in Ireland do not have a legal right to deliver an opening or closing statement at
a criminal trial.
59. Irish law does, however, make provision for the delivery by an AV of a Victim
Impact Statement. This procedure is discussed at Section (e) below.
Right to have a support person, intermediary or interpreter during trial :
60. Where an AV is testifying as a witness in a criminal trial for a violent or sexual
offence, he or she is entitled to apply to give evidence through an intermediary under
the Criminal Evidence Act 1992. 38 This right is not available to all witnesses and only
witnesses who are under 18 years of age and giving evidence through a live television
link under section 13 of the Criminal Evidence Act 1992, or witnesses with a ‘mental
handicap’, are eligible to apply for this facility. 39
61. ‘Victim Support at Court’ (‘VSAC’) is a non -statutory organisation which provides
support both before and during court proceedings to AVs. 40 Volunteers are trained to
support prosecution witnesses and their families who have been called to court to
give evidence. A Garda Liaison Officer will usually arrange for a volunteer from
VSAC to meet with an AV in advance of the trial to conduct a pre -trial visit to the
court. If desired, a volunteer from VSAC can accompany an AV throughout the trial.
Access to other special measures
aggravated sexual assault, incitement to aggravated sexual assault and conspiring to commit any of the
foregoing offences.”
37
The Civil Legal Aid Act 1995, s 26(3) as amended by the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2008, s
78.
38
The Criminal Evidence Act 1992, s 14(1).
39
The Criminal Evidence Act 1992 originally set this age at ‘under 17’ but this was amended by s 257(3) of the
Children Act 2001.
40
www.Vsac.ie
62. If AVs fall into designated categories of vulnerable witnesses, special measures may
be available to them (such as giving evidence through television may order the State
to provide an interpreter for a complainant, defendant or witness, if the court is
satisfied that the interests of justice so require. These rights are not generally
available to all victims/witnesses. They will be addressed in question 2 below.
(e)
At the time of sentencing, are there any provisions for victim impact statements?
Is the reward of compensation allowed at sentencing? If yes, who bears this cost?
Are there any other forms of rehabilitation guaranteed to AVs? Do these depend
on a finding of guilt?
Victim Impact Statements: General Comment
63. Victim Impact Statements were introduced into Irish law by section 5 of the Criminal
Justice Act 1993. However, due to certain perceived deficiencies in the wording of
this provision- namely its failure to recognise the right of an AV’s family member to
give a victim impact state ment on his of her behalf 41 and its failure to include a
measure to prevent abuse of the forum by an AV – section 5 of the 1993 Act was
amended by section 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2010.
Scope of Victim Impact Statement
64. Section 5 of the 1993 Act, as amended, requires judges to consider the impact of
certain specified offences on the victim when determining the sentence to be
imposed in circumstances where the offence in question is sexual, non-fatal or
violent in nature. 42
65. Specifically, section 5 of the 1993 Act invites an AV to articulate to the court the
“effect (whether long-term or otherwise) of the offence” on him or her.
66. Pursuant to section 5(1)(b) of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, the right to deliver a
victim impact statement does not merely re st with the direct victim of the crime but
it also includes a family member of that person in circumstances where the victim has
41
Prior to the amendments introduced by the Criminal Procedure Act 2010, s 5 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993
Act only recognised direct victims of crime as having a legal right to deliver a victim impact statement.
However, due to the narrowness of this construction, Irish courts began a practice of extending this testimonial
right to family members of victims of homicide (see, for instance, DPP v O’Donoghue [2007] 2 IR 336).
42
Specifically, according to s 5(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, victim impact statements can be delivered
in relation to the following categories of offences: (i) a sexual offence within the meaning of the Criminal
Evidence Act 1992, (ii) an offence involving violence or (iii) the threat of violence to a person an offence under
the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997.
died, is ill or is otherwise incapacitated as a result of the commission of the offence.
In addition section 5(b)(iv) expressly entitles the family members of a deceased
victim of homicide to deliver evidence of the impact of the crime on the victim prior
to his or her death, and on the family members of the person who has died.
67. A family member or a parent or guardian may also giv e evidence under section
5(3)(b) of the Criminal Justice Act 1993 where the victim of the crime is a child
under 14 years of age or suffers from a mental disorder (not related to the
commission of the offence).
68. Under section 5(4) of the 1993 Act, as amend ed, a court shall not draw an inference
that a crime had little or no effect on an AV in circumstances where he or she or a
family member fails to deliver a victim impact statement.
Oral and Written Delivery of Victim Impact Statements
69. Specifically, section 5(3)(a) of the Criminal Justice Act 1993 requires the court to
hear the evidence of the victim if he or she wishes to testify. Pursuant to this
provision victims are invited to deliver the statement orally in the courtroom during
the sentencing trial or may submit a victim impact report to the court.
Penalties for Abuse of Victim Impact Statement
70. Section 5(5)(a) of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, as amended, empowers the court to
make an order prohibiting the publication or broadcast of the content of a victim
impact statement. 43
71. A person guilty of breaching this provision shall be liable (i) on summary conviction,
to a fine not exceeding €5,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12
months or to both, or (ii) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding
€50,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years or to both.
Victim Compensation
72. There are two distinct methods of securing compensation as an AV within the Irish
criminal justice system, namely (i) through The Criminal Inju ries Compensation
43
This measure was introduced to prevent abuse of the victim impact statement procedure by AVs who might
use it as a forum to publically raise unsubstantiated, prejudicial allegations of little probative value. In particular,
this measure can be perceived as a legislative response to the ruling in DPP v O’Donoghue [2007] 2 IR 336. In
this case the mother of a deceased victim delivered a victim impact statement at the sentencing hearing but, in so
doing, referred to matters which had not been given in evidence in court and which made serious allegations
against the convicted person which had not formed part of the case proven in the trial.
Tribunal (funded by the State) and (ii) under section 6 of the Criminal Justice Act
1993 (funded by an offender).
73. The Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal is a non -statutory body, funded by the
Department of Justice and Equality
which has the objective of providing
compensation to victims or crime for expenses incurred or losses suffered as result
of (i) a violent crime or (ii) while assisting or trying to assist in preventing a crime or
saving a human life. This comepnesation is awarded in accordance with the
Tribunal’s ‘Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted’ 44.
74. Under the terms of the Scheme, the crime victim or, if that person has died, his or
her immediate family can claim compensation. In addition, persons who cared for the
crime victim and incurred expense as a result of his or her injuries can also seek
compensation.
75. In circumstaces where the injuries sustained by the AV are non -fatal, an application
for compensation must be made no later than three months after the incident. 45 There
is no time limit for fatal applications.
76. Compensation under the Scheme only covers bills, expensees and loss of earnings. It
does not provide general compensation for pain or suffering nor does it cover losses
attributable to stoeln or damaged property. The Tribunal is entitled to deny or reduce
an award of compensation if it feels the AV was wholly or partyl responisble for the
criminal incident. Moreover the Tribunal is entitled to reduce the amount of
compensation on the basis of an AV’s “conduct…character or his way of life” 46. The
Tribunal will also refuse to award compensation where an AV lived with the assaliant
in the same house before the offence.
77. In order to be eligible to claim compensation under the Scheme it mus t be shown
that the offence giving rise to injury has been the subject of criminal proceedings or
that it was reported to the Gardai without delay .
78. Compensation for AVs can also be awarded as part of a sentence under the Criminal
Justice Act 1993. 47 On conviction, a court may make an order requireing the offender
to pay compensation for any personal injury or loss resulting from the offence to any
person suffering such loss. The order can be made in addition to, or in lieu of, any
44
For more information see: http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/Criminal_Injuries_Compensation_Scheme.
Hereinafter ‘the Scheme’.
45
It should, however, be noted that the tribunal has authority under the Scheme to extend this time limit in
circumstances where the applicant can show that the reason for the delay in submitting the application justifies
exceptional treatment of the application.
46
Department of Justice and Equality, Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted, s 14.
47
The Criminal Justice Act 1993, s 6.
other sentence. This award is contingent on a prior determination of guilt (i.e. a
conviction).
Other forms of rehabilitation
79. There is no formal restorative justice programme in Ireland. A limited restorative
justice initiative does however exist in relati on to offences by children. Specifically,
section 32 of the Children Act 2001 expressly recognises the rights of an AV to
attend a “family conference” aimed at exploring the reasons for the commission of a
crime by a child and discuss measures to prevent s uch an incident occurring again.
80. There is, as yet, no legislative basis for the use of restorative justice in cases
invovlving adult offenders. However, there are two restorative justice programmes
currently operating in Ireland on a non -statutory basis: the Nenagh Community
Reparation Project, based in County Tipperary and Restorative Justice Systems based
in Tallagh, Dublin. The operation of these schemes is limited in geographical and
monetary terms.
(f)
48
What rights rest with the alleged victim in respect of the appeal?
81. AVs have no direct right of appeal in relation to an acquittal. Moreover the DPP has
no right of appeal in relation to an acquittal.
82. Similarly AVs have no direct right of appeal in relation to a sentence . However,
section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, as amended by section 23 of the Criminal
Justice Act 2006, does empower the DPP to appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal
to review an unduly lenient sentence for a conviction on indictment. 49
(g)
Are there any rights available to the alleged victim when it comes to enforcement?
83. An AV does not have any legal enforcement rights in relation to a criminal sanction.
In November 2013, the Probation Service published its ‘Restorative Justice Strategy’ which included the
following in its objectives for 2014/2014, “Explore the opportunities for further development of Restorative
Justice projects/programmes nationally as well as for specific categories of offenders including young people,
adult offenders who have hurt people and members of the travelling community”. See Probation Service,
‘Restorative Justice Strategy’, (November 2013).
49
It should be noted that, following Director of Public Prosecutions v. Byrne [1995] 1 ILRM 279, it now
accepted that nothing but a substantial departure from what would be regarded as the appropriate sentence
justifies an application to increase a sentence. In Director of Public Prosecutions v. Redmond [2001] 3 IR 390, it
was held that there must be an error of principle by the sentencing court to justify altering the sentence.
48
84. In section 6 of the Victims Charter the Prison Service undertakes to take account , in
all cases of temporary release, any possible risk to an AV and to make every effort to
prevent an offender in prison from causing further upset to an AV.
85. For the sake of completeness, it should be noted that there are three distinct legal
mechanisms for securing the early release of a convicted offender in Irish law:
(i)
Executive power to commute or remit sentence under Article 13.6 of the
Constitution;
(ii)
Ministerial power to grant remission under the section 59(1) of the Prison
Rules 2007; and
(iii)
Ministerial power to grant temporary release or parole under section 2 of the
Criminal Justice Act 1960 as amended by the Criminal Justice (Temporary
Release of Prisoners) Act 2003. Under section 2(2) of the Criminal Justice Act
1960, as amended, the Minister for Ju stice and Equality is obliged to have
regard to the potential threat of granting parole or temporary release to the
safety and security of the public, including the victim. 50
(h) Are there any other rights that facilitate alleged victim participation not covered in
the above chapter?
Protection Against Intimidation
86. It is a statutory offence to intimidate witnesses or their families. 51
87. Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1999 provides that in any proceedings on
indictment for an offence a person other than the accused (which may include
children) may, with the leave of the court, give evidence through a live television
link. A court shall not grant leave unless it is satisfied that the person is likely to be
in fear or subject to intimidation in giving evidence otherwise.
Bail Conditions
88. As discussed above, section 6(1) of the Bail Act 1997 stipulates a number of
conditions which a trial judge can impose on an order for bail, including “ (v) that the
accused person refrains from having any contact with such person or persons as the
court may specify”. This can include the AV.
50
In arriving at a decision to grant temporary release or parole, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence
can consider the recommendations of the Parole Board. The Parole Board was established on a non-statutory
basis in 2001 to consider temporary release for life sentence and other long-term prisoners.
51
The Criminal Justice Act 1999, s 41.
Support from the Courts Service
89. The Courts Service has issued a number of publications in recent years aimed at
providing great information to witnesses and their families. For ins tance, in March
2012, the Courts Service produced a booklet and DVD entitled ‘Going to Court’
which provides a guide to the court system for child and young witnesses as well as
parents and guardians. In addition in 2010 the Courts Service published a deta iled
explanatory guide entitled ‘Explaining the Courts’.
Support from the Irish Prison Service
90. The Irish Prison Service has introduced a Victim Liaison Service to keep victims
informed about decisions about detention. When an AV makes a request, the Prison
Service Victim Liaison Officer will enter into direct contact with them to inform
them of any significant development in the management of the offender’s sentence as
well as any impending release. 52
QUESTION 2: ARE THERE ANY SPECIAL CATEGORIES OF
ALLEGED VICTIMS (EG CHILD WITNESSES, WITNESSES WITH
INTELLECTUAL
OR
MENTAL
DISABILITY,
WITNESSES
ALLEGING SEXUAL ABUSE ETC) TO WHOM THE ABOVE RIGHTS
ARE AVAILABLE? IF YES, DEFINE THOSE CATEGORIES AND
ANSWER THE ABOVE QUESTION IN RESPECT OF EACH
CATEGORY.
91. In addition to the universal rights outlined above, the following special measures are
available to certain categories of vulnerable AVs, among other witnesses, within the
Irish criminal justice system:
The Use Of Live Video Links

Section 13 of the Criminal Evidence Act 1992 allows evidence to be given by
AVs, among other witnesses, via a live television link in cases of physical or
sexual abuse where the testifying witness is under 18 years of age or is a
person with a ‘mental handicap’.
52
http://www.irishprisons.ie/index.php/victim-liaison-service

Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1999 provides that in any proceedings
on indictment for an offence a person other than the accused (which may
include children) may, with the leave of the court, give evidence through a live
television link. A court shall not grant leave unless it is satisfied that the
person is likely to be in fear or subject to intimidation in giving evidence
otherwise.

Section 255 of the Children’s Act 2001 allows evidence to be given by a child by (a) sworn
deposition or (b) television link where a District Court judge is satisfied on the evidence of
a medical practitioner that the delivery of evidence in court would involve a serious danger
to the child witness' safety, health or well-being. However this section only applies in
relation to the offences listed in Part 12 of the 2001 Act (being cruelty, begging, allowing a
child to be in a brothel, encouraging a sexual offence on a child) and Schedule 1 of the
2001 Act (sexual and violent offences against a child).
The Use Of Intermediaries

Section 14(1) of the Criminal Evidence Act 1992 allows questions to be put
through an intermediary where an AV, among other witnesses, is giving
evidence via video link (i.e. in cases of physical or sexual abuse where the
testifying witness is under 18 years of age or is a person with a ‘mental
handicap’). Questions must be put in the words of the questioner or so as to
communicate the question to the witness in a way which is appropriate to his
or her mental condition.
Removal Of Wigs And Gowns

Section 13(1) of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992 states that when evidence is
being given through a live television link neither the judge, solicitor or
barrister shall wear a wig or gown.

Section 5A of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, as amended by s.5 of the Criminal
Procedure Act, 2010, states that when a child or person with a ‘mental
disorder’ is giving evidence via television link for the purpos es of a Victim
Impact Statement neither the judge, solicitor or barrister shall wear a wig or
gown.
Admission Of Out-Of-Court Video Recordings

Section 16(1) of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992 states that a video
recording of any evidence given by a person under 18 years of age or with a
‘mental handicap’ through a live television link at the preliminary
examination of a sexual or violent offence shall be admissible at trial.
Victim Impact Statements by Video Link

Section 5A of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, as amended by s.5 of the Criminal
Procedure Act, 2010, provides that a child or person with a mental disorder
may give a Victim Impact Statement via television link. During the Statement
the Court can direct that question be delivered through an intermediary if it is
in the interests of justice. 53

Section 5B of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, as amended by s.5 of the Criminal
Procedure Act, 2010, provides that questions may be put to a child or person
with a mental disorder who is delivering a Victim Impact Statement through an
intermediary.
Right to Give Unsworn Testimony

Section 27 of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992 provides for the right of a child
under 14 years of age or a person with a ‘mental handicap’ to give unsworn
testimony.
Abolition of Corroboration Requirement

Section 28(1) of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992 abolished the traditional
requirement that a child’s unsworn testimony had to be corroborated .

In addition section 28(2) of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992 abolished the
mandatory requirement on trial judges to warn juries of the dangers of
convicting on the sworn evidence of a child in t he absence of corroboration
by. Trial judges now enjoy a discretion in determining whether or not to issue
such a warning.
CONCLUSION
53
The Criminal Justice Act1993 Act, s 5B as amended by the Criminal Procedure Act, 2010, s 6.

Victim participation in the Irish criminal justice system i s facilitated through the
subtle interplay of a well-established culture of policy commitments and a
limited armoury of legally enforceable rights.

The vast majority of commitments made by Irish criminal justice agencies to
AVs are contained in the Victims Charter. This is a non-binding and
unenforceable instrument. The Irish legislative framework, by contrast, contains
little in the way of firm commitments towards the participatory interests of
victims.

There are two distinct systems for prosecuting crime in Ireland, namely (i) a
public prosecution system and (ii) a private prosecution system.
Private Prosecution System

Under the private prosecution system any persons (including an AV) can initiate
a prosecution as a ‘common informer’ - State (Collins) v. Ruane [1984] IR 105.

In private prosecutions an AV has full autonomy in designing the investigation
but he or she is deprived of the wide statutory powers of investigation afforded
to members of an Garda Síochána. Private prosecutors are not entitled to
receive casefiles from an Garda Síochána of the DPP- H v The Director of Public
Prosecutions and The Commissioner of the Garda Síochána, Respondents [1994] 2 IR 589.

Private prosecutions can only be invoked for the prosecution of summary
offences and in cases involving a prosecution on indictment, a private individual
is only entitled to initiate and pursue proceedings up to the point at which a
decision is made on whether or not to formally send an accused forward to trial.
Once the applicant is sent for trial, the DPP becomes dominus litis.
Public Prosecution System

In relation to public prosecutions, there is no express duty on an Garda
Síochána to investigate a complaint. It has been confirmed that the police enjoy
a large measure of discretion in exercising their discretion to investigate a
complaint and the courts will only review such decisions in exceptional cases Fowley v Conroy [2005] 3 IR 480.

Notwithstanding the absence of a legal requirement on an Garda Síochána to
investigate a complaint, the gardaí nevertheless give an undertaking in section 2
of the Victims Charter to investigate the complaint of an AV.

In addition, in section 2 of the Victims Charter, the gardaí undertake to explain
to AVs the steps involve in a criminal investigation, keep them informed of
proceedings and provide them with detail about the Crime Victims’ Helpline
and other services available for AVs.

The Garda Victim Liaison Office (GVLO) is responsible for supporting the
implementation of the Garda Síochána’s Victims Charter.

Any AV aggrieved by a decision of a member of an Garda S íochána is entitled
to lodge a formal complaint with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission.

Witnesses who are at risk of intimidation are entitled to apply for anonymity
under the Witness Protection Programme operated by an Garda Síochána.

In addition, AVs of sexual assault, AVs of human trafficking and child AVs are
entitled to anonymity in criminal proceedings under the Criminal Law (Rape)
Amendment Act 1981 Act, the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008 and
the Children Act 2001 Act respectively.

The DPP enjoys a very wide discretion in the exercise of its prosecutorial
powers- State (McCormack) v Curran [1987] ILRM 225.

A prosecutorial decision by the DPP will only be reviewed where it can be
shown that the Director acted in bad faith or in pursuit of an improper motive
or policy.

Notwithstanding the absence of a legal obligation to consult with an AV, the
Office of the DPP nevertheless undertakes in section 4 of the Victims Charter,
to consider the views of an AV when deciding whether or not to prosecute.

The DPP only discloses the reasons for his decision in cases involving a
deceased victim.

AVs have no legal right to contribute to determinations concerning pre -trial
detention. In section 2 of the Victims Charter, however, the Garda Síocána give
an undertaking to inform AVs about whether an accused has been granted bail
and any conditions of such bail.

AVs do not have a legal right to access casefiles or to be provided with updates
in relation to an investigation or trial proceeding.

While AVs may not be formally entitled to a lega l right of information on
proceedings, the DPP has nevertheless made a commitment to all AVs in the
Victims Charter to treat AVs with respect and to work with the Gardaí to make
sure that AVs are kept up to date on a case.

With the exception of cases where an AVs prior sexual history is under
examination at trial, AVs are not prima facia entitled to spate legal representation
in court.

AVs are entitled to free means-tested legal advice for AVs of certain specified
sexual offences- The Civil Legal Aid Act 1995, s 26.

AVs in Ireland do not have a legal right to deliver an opening or closing
statement at a criminal trial.

Questions can be put to an AV through an intermediary where an he or she is
giving evidence via video link (i.e. in cases of physical or sexual abuse where the
testifying witness is under 18 years of age or is a person with a ‘mental
handicap’)- The Criminal Evidence Act 1992, s 14(1).

‘Victim Support at Court’ (‘VSAC’) provid e volunteers to accompany AVs to
court, if desired.

AVs are entitled to deliver a Victim Impact Statement at sentencing for the
purpose of articulating to the court the “ effect of the offence” on him or hersection 5 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, as a mended. The right extends to
family members of an AV in circumstances where the victim has died, is ill or is
otherwise incapacitated as a result of the commission of the offence.

The court can make an order prohibiting the publication or broadcast of the
content of a victim impact statement- section 5(5)(a) of the Criminal Justice Act
1993, as amended.

There are two distinct methods of securing compensation as an AV within the
Irish criminal justice system, namely (i) through The Criminal Injuries
Compensation Tribunal (funded by the State) and (ii) under section 6 of the
Criminal Justice Act 1993 (funded by an offender).

There is no formal restorative justice programme in Ireland for adult AVs. A
limited restorative justice initiative does however exist i n relation to offences by
children- section 32 of the Children Act 2001.

AVs have no direct right of appeal in relation to an acquittal or a sentence.

An AV does not have any legal enforcement rights in relation to a criminal
sanction. However, in section 6 of the Victims Charter the Prison Service
undertakes to take account, in all cases of temporary release, any possible risk
to an AV and to make every effort to prevent an offender in prison from
causing further upset to an AV.

In addition to the universal rights outlined above, the following special
measures are available to certain categories of vulnerable AVs, among other
witnesses, within the Irish criminal justice system:

the use of live video links

the use of intermediaries

removal of wigs and gowns

admission of out-of-court video recordings

victim impact statements by video link

right to give unsworn testimony

abolition of corroboration requirement.