2006 Supreme(NIR)(NICA) 20
1
Neutral Citation No. [2006] NICA 34 Ref: KERC5626
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered: 19/06/2006
(subject to editorial corrections)
IN HER MAJESTY’S COURT OF APPEAL IN NORTHERN IRELAND
________
THE QUEEN
v
GERARD ROBERT SMITH
________
Before Kerr LCJ, Campbell LJ and Sheil LJ
________
KERR LCJ
Introduction
[1] This is an application by Gerard Robert Smith for leave to appeal against
his conviction of two offences of indecent assault contrary to section 52 of the
Offences against the Person Act 1861 and for leave to have time extended
within which the application might be made. The applications were heard on
19 June 2006 and on that date we dismissed both applications and indicated
that we would give our reasons later. In this judgment we now provide those
reasons.
Factual Background
[2] The applicant was born on 17 May 1972. In March 2003, he was tried
before His Honour Judge Markey QC and a jury at Belfast Crown Court on
ten counts of sexual offences committed against his cousin whom we shall
refer to as the complainant. On 6 March 2003, the applicant was convicted by
a jury on two counts of indecent assault. These related to incidents alleged to
have occurred in the period from 1987 to 1989, when the applicant was
between 14 and 17 years old and the complainant was between 9 and 12 years
of age.
2
[3] On 3 April 2003, Judge Markey sentenced the applicant to two years’
imprisonment (one year on each count of indecent assault to run
consecutively). The judge ordered that the applicant’s release from
imprisonment should be on licence under article 26 of the Criminal Justice
(Northern Ireland) Order 1996. He was discharged from prison on 5 March
2004 and the period of supervision on licence ended on 5 March 2005.
[4] On 12 January 2006, as required by section 5(1) of the Human Rights Act
1998 and rule 20A of the Criminal Appeal (Northern Ireland) Rules 1968, this
court notified the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland that the applicant
had sought a declaration of incompatibility under section 4 of HRA in relation
to section 1 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act (Northern Ireland) 1923 (as
amended) and that in consequence we would consider the compatibility of
that provision with the applicant’s convention rights. By notice dated 12
January 2006, pursuant to rule 20B of the 1968 Rules, the Secretary of State
notified the court that he wished to be joined as a party to the proceedings.
He was duly made a party and was represented at the hearing by Mr
McCloskey QC.
Statutory Background
The Offences against the Person Act 1861
[5] The applicant was convicted of two counts of indecent assault on a female
under the age of 17, contrary to section 52 of the Offences Against the Person
Act 1861 which provides: -
“Whosoever shall be convicted of any indecent
assault upon any female shall be liable, at the
discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any
term not exceeding ten years or to be fined or
both”.
[6] The offences in the present case occurred before 3 October 1989 when, by
virtue of article 12 of the Treatment of Offenders (Northern Ireland) Order
1989, the maximum penalty for offences of this nature was increased from
two to ten years’ imprisonment. The longest period of imprisonment to
which the applicant could be sentenced was, therefore, two years.
Criminal Law Amendment Act (Northern Ireland) 1923 (as amended)
[7] The provision in respect of which the applicant sought a declaration of
incompatibility was section 1 of the 1923 Act which provides: -
“Consent of young person to be no defence
3
It shall be no defence to a charge or indictment for
an indecent assault on a child or young person
under the age of seventeen to prove that he or she
consented to the act of indecency”.
Human Rights Act 1998
[8] Section 6(1) of HRA provides that it