Minutes of Proceedings - 12 December 2007

Present: 
Mr Alban Maginness (Chair) 
Mr Alex Attwood 
Ms Carál Ní Chuilín 
Dr Stephen Farry 
Mr Simon Hamilton (Deputising for Mr McCausland) 
Mr Raymond McCartney (Deputy Chair) 
Mr Alan McFarland 
Mr Jim Wells 
Mr Peter Weir

Attendees:
Mr Kevin Shiels, Committee Clerk
Ms Roisin Fleetham, Assistant Clerk
Ms Karen Roy, Clerical Supervisor
Ms Jane Hanna, Clerical Officer 
Mr Brian McCaughey, PBNI 
Mr Ronnie Spence, PBNI 
Ms Cheryl Lamont, PBNI 
Ms Louise Cooper, PBNI 
Mr Graham Kelly, PBNI 
Mr Kit Chivers, CJINI 
Mr Brendan McGuigan, CJINI 
Mr Tom McGonigle, CJINI

Apologies:
Mr Danny Kennedy 
Mr Nelson McCausland 
Mr John O’Dowd

2.10pm the meeting opened in public session Mr Maginness in the Chair.

  1. Apologies

The apologies were noted. Mr Hamilton attended the meeting in place of Mr McCausland.

2.12pm Mr McCartney joined the meeting

  1. Minutes of last meeting

The Committee agreed the minutes of the meeting 5 December 2007. They will be published on the website.

2.15pm Dr Farry joined the meeting 
2.15pm Ms Ní Chuilín joined the meeting

  1. Matters Arising

The Chair informed Members that the NIO had clarified a number of issues following the last meeting. The NIO response was included at Tab 2 of Members’ packs. It included an easy-read chart relating to sentencing disposals (see Annex 2 to these minutes). The Committee staff had added a flowchart also for the benefit of Members (see also Annex 2).

The Chairperson informed members that, following last week’s meeting, and in view of the logistical problems raised by DSD around enforcement of the Drinking in Public Provisions, the Clerk had been asked to contact PSNI seeking an official line from them regarding their role. The Chair advised that the Committee should await the official PSNI written response.

  1. Declaration of Interests

The Chair invited Members to declare any amended Declaration of Interests and forward it in writing to the Committee Clerk.

  1. Briefing by Probation Board Northern Ireland

The Chair introduced the Probation Board Chairman Mr Ronnie Spence, Chief Probation Officer Mr Brian McCaughey, Ms Cheryl Lamont, Deputy Chief Probation Officer, Ms Louise Cooper, Head of Information & Research and Mr Graham Kelly . They gave a presentation to Members, highlighting the proposed provisions they support and any concerns held. A question and answer session followed.

2.56pm Mr McCartney left the room 
2.58pm Mr McCartney re-entered the room 
3.08pm Mr McFarland left the room 
3.10pm Mr McFarland re-entered the room

  1. Briefing by Criminal Justice Inspection Team Northern Ireland

The Chair introduced Mr Kit Chivers, Chief Inspector, Mr Brendan McGuigan, Deputy Chief Inspector and Mr Tom McGonigle of the Criminal Justice Team. They gave a presentation to Members, highlighting the proposed provisions they support and any concerns held. A question and answer session followed.

3.40pm Ms Ní Chuilín left the meeting

  1. Briefing from Clerk on future evidence sessions

The Clerk informed Members that the closing date for responses to the Committee’s Public Notice was 10 December 2007.

The Clerk confirmed that contact had been made with the Prison Service NI who are expected to attend the meeting on 9 January 2008. Victim Support NI declined the invitation to provide oral evidence but will forward a written submission. PSNI are now unable to attend the meeting on 18 December although DOE Officials will fully represent their views on the proposed provisions relating to driving offences. The Chair proposed and Members agreed that the PSNI should be invited to a future meeting to address Members’ concerns relating to alcohol consumption in public and the use of quad bikes. The Clerk outlined all future evidence sessions, See Annex 1.

  1. Any other Business

The Chair informed Members that they had received copies of Hansard from the meeting of 28 November and 5 December and to forward any corrections to the Clerk.

The Chair informed Members that following oral evidence at the meeting on 18 December 30 minutes would be allocated in closed session to discuss the Committee’s initial views on the Draft Order and any emerging concerns or recommendations that Members may have for inclusion in the Committee Report.

The Chair reminded Members there would be no meeting on 3 January 2008 as previously agreed.

  1. Date and time of next meeting

The Committee agreed that it would meet on Tuesday 18 December 2007 at 2pm in room 144.

Future meetings are as follows: 
Wednesday 9 January 2pm Senate Chamber 
Wednesday 16 January 2pm Senate Chamber

3.55pm the Chairperson adjourned the meeting.

Mr Alban Maginness MLA
Chairperson, Ad Hoc Committee
12 December 2007
Annex 1
Schedule of Future Evidence Sessions

18 December 2007

2.15pm

Chair of Life Sentence Review Commissioner Mr Peter Smith

2.45pm

DOE Officials Mr John McMullan and Mr John Brogan

09 January 2008

2.15pm

 

2.45pm

 

3.15pm

NIACRO

 

Human Rights Commission Ms Monica McWilliams, Ms Nazia Latif

 

Prison Service Mr Robin Mazefield, Ms Eddie Sinn and Mr Brian Ingram

 

 

 

To Note:

Youth Justice Agency will not be giving oral evidence to the Committee.

Victim Support will forward a written submission.

PSNI cannot attend 18 December, DOE will fully represent their views in

relation to Driving Offences provisions within the draft Order.

Annex 2
Is it the court that decides when passing sentence what the remission/period on licence shall be?

The period on licence should not be equated to remission. Under the draft Order, the current standard sentence of imprisonment is replaced with a single determinate sentence comprising two distinct parts – a custodial term followed by a period of compulsory post-release supervision. The court decides when sentencing an offender what the custodial period shall be and what the licence period shall be. The offender serves the sentence in full.

When sentencing an offender to an ECS (Article 5), the court imposes a custodial sentence and an extended licence period. The offender is considered for release, by the Parole Commissioners, at the halfway point of the custodial sentence, but could, if necessary for the protection of the public, be detained in custody until the end of the custodial sentence. On release the offender is subject to licence conditions for any period remaining of the custodial sentence plus the period of extended licence determined by the court. If recalled, the offender could be detained in custody until the end of the extended licence period

When sentencing an offender to an ICS (Article 4), the court sets a minimum term which must be served in full before the offender can be considered for release. An ICS sentenced offender may be detained indefinitely and will be released on licence only when the Parole Commissioners direct. An ICS licence then lasts for the duration of the offender’s life unless he successfully applies to have it terminated after a qualifying period of 10 years after release.

Can you confirm that Art 15 is a direct lift from the CJ (NI) Order 1996 and that there are no new provisions here re Mentally Disordered Offenders?

There are no new provisions in Article 15 – it is a replica of Article 22 of the Criminal Justice ( Northern Ireland) Order 1996 with the technical addition of paragraph 5 to define ‘mentally disordered’. This definition is taken from the Interpretation (Article 2) in the 1996 Order.

Supervised Activity Orders - what type of activities are envisaged for Rules under para 6 of sch 3. One Member hoped they would be effective deterrents - not flower-arranging and pottery- but could be linked in some way to the offence (removing graffiti for a graffiti offence?)

At this stage we would envisage the activities spanning a range of options: work related; training and educational; and community service style activities. We need to ensure that activities can be tailored to individual circumstances. The detail will be developed in light of consultation and with relevant authorities.

“Road traffic Offences - Do any of these new provisions cover so called joy-riders or runarounds? Some members also raised a question around - are passengers in such vehicles also liable to prosecution?”

The answer is yes if the vehicle is being driven in a manner which is causing or is likely to cause alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public but this is an overlay on the fact that joy riders and persons driving run arounds will have committed a number of other offences.

With the joy riders they have committed an offence under section 12 of the Theft Act ( Northern Ireland) 1969 which currently carries a maximum penalty of 3 years imprisonment it is also an offence for someone to allow themselves to be conveyed in a car which is being used for joy riding.

In relation to run-arounds, and this would again also apply to the joy riding, the drivers will normally not have licences, insurances or tax and will be committing all those offences. If the run around is not stolen it will not be an offence for the passenger who is carried in it and the same for the vehicle causing alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public but that is with the qualification that if the passenger is inciting the bad driving which causes the alarm, distress or annoyance then he will also be party to the principal offences under Articles 12 (Careless and Inconsiderate Driving) or 48 (of Road Driving) of the Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1995 and as an accessory to the offence could be prosecuted.

How the court should decide which sentencing disposals in the draft Order to use on conviction

How the court should decide which sentencing disposals in the draft Order to use on conviction

 

NIO Response to queries from the Ad-Hoc Committee on the draft Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Order

Chart of how the court should decide which sentencing disposals in the draft Order to use on conviction:

  1. Does the offence attract a mandatory life sentence?

    a. Yes: issue a life sentence 
    b. No: go to 2

  2. Is a life sentence penalty available for the offence?

a. Yes: Does the offence merit a life sentence by virtue of the seriousness of the offence?

i. Yes: issue a life sentence 
ii. No: go to 3

b. No: go to 3

  1. Is the offence a specified offence? (i.e. one of the offences listed in Schedule 2)?

a. Yes: go to 4. 
b. No: go to 9.

  1. Does the offender offer a significant risk of serious harm to the public?

a. Yes: go to 5. 
b. No: go to 9.

  1. Is the specified offence also a serious offence (i.e. listed in Schedule 1)?

a. Yes: go to 6. 
b. No: go to 7.

  1. Would an ECS sentence be adequate to protect the public from serious harm?

a. Yes: go to 7. 
b. No: go to 8.

  1. Issue an ECS.
  2. Issue an ICS.
  3. Does the offence merit a custodial sentence?

a. Yes: issue a standard determinate sentence 
b. No: issue a non-custodial disposal.

Find MLAs

Find your MLAs

Locate MLAs

Search

News and Media Centre

Visit the News and Media Centre

Read press releases, watch live and archived video

Find out more

Follow the Assembly

Follow the Assembly on our social media channels

Keep up-to-date with the Assembly

Find out more

Useful Contacts

Contact us

Contacts for different parts of the Assembly

Contact Us