The proposal from Mr Justice Carney to extend jurisdiction in the trial of rape and murder to the Circuit Court on a temporary basis deserves serious consideration.
Mr Justice Carney made his proposal as an interim measure to deal with the huge backlog of such cases in the Central Criminal Court, which has exclusive jurisdiction. At the moment, delays in these cases coming to trial are running at 18 months, and the allocation of extra judges, along with extra sittings in the holiday month of September, has done little to relieve it.
The judge described graphically the effect such delays have on victims and their relatives. They may often have to encounter the accused on a regular basis because defendants are normally released on bail pending trial.
The stress of awaiting a trial that may be more than a year away can have seriously injurious effects on young rape victims in particular, who could be studying for examinations. All of this is exacerbated when, as sometimes happens, the trial has to be abandoned and the case goes back to the end of the queue.
There is a working group considering the whole issue of the jurisdiction of the different courts in criminal matters. It is chaired by Mr Justice Fennelly, a judge of the Supreme Court, and is due to report within weeks. However, its recommendations will need to be discussed before any necessary legislation is introduced, and that in turn will take months, if not years, to be enacted, so any reform following this report is still some time away.
Mr Justice Carney's proposal is for a temporary extension of jurisdiction for a period of two years. This would require a brief Bill to be passed by the Oireachtas, but such Bills, to allow for a specific measure, are not unprecedented.
Allowing rape to be tried outside the Central Criminal Court has been opposed by agencies working with rape victims, like the Network of Rape Crisis Centres. They argue that the anonymity currently enjoyed by victims who come to Dublin could be eroded in Circuit courts, and that hearing such cases in these courts could allow for the intimidation of victims by the family or friends of the accused, especially because of the lack of separate waiting facilities. These arguments have been made to the Fennelly working group, which will consider them.
However, it is not impossible to combine such a temporary extension of jurisdiction with measures to protect victims. Introducing such a measure would not only help clear the backlog in the short term, but would allow for the change to be tested in practice and, therefore, enrich the debate on the Fennelly report.