AS a practising barrister in Dublin and the Northern Circuit, I don't believe the law as it currently stands is in favour of the householder. Up to now, although courts and juries may have been sympathetic to the plight of householders, the law has prevented them from giving a judgement they may have wanted to. By amending the law to allow householders to repel intruders, the Minister for Justice and Tanaiste Michael McDowell will be rebalancing the law in favour of householders. Removing that part of the law will simply leave it open for juries to do what they couldn't do before, because of the restriction.

Having been the victim of three burglaries in the space of nine months and having been in my home on two of those occasions, I welcome the proposed amendments. Now you will no longer have to retreat from your home if there is an intruder or you are burgled. You will be able to defend your property, but there will be guidelines. It will not give homeowners a free-for-all or a 007 licence to kill.

Mr McDowell was reacting to the Law Reform Commission's Report which stated that the law in relation to self-defence against intruders in the home needs to be strengthened. This area came to the forefront in the Padraig Nally case last year.

The Law in relation to this area is currently governed by the Non Fatal Offences Against the Persons Act, 1997 and by Common Law. That act states that individuals are legally allowed to use reasonable force in the circumstances as they believe them to be in order to protect themselves, their family or their property.

It also states that the fact that a person had an opportunity to retreat prior to using force shall be taken into account in assessing whether the use of force was reasonable.

At first glance the law may seem reasonably clear, however, when trying to apply it to an actual burglary situation it may have resulted in many an injustice to householders. At present if you come across an intruder in your home you have an obligation to retreat from the home if that option is available to you. If that option is not available to you then you can use reasonable force to protect yourself, your family or your property. However, you can not use more force than is reasonably necessary. If you do use more force than may objectively be considered necessary this act could be considered unlawful. I cannot imagine how an unsuspecting householder who comes across an intruder in his home in the middle of the night is supposed to restrain himself to the point where he can analyse his options in relation to retreating or as to what force he should or should not use to keep himself within the boundaries of the law. Most people in that situation act first and think later.

Mr McDowell has suggested that the law requiring an individual to retreat (from the family home) where possible be abolished. I wholeheartedly agree with this. It is simply not practical or fair to expect an innocent householder to retreat when faced with an intruder who may be, by his very presence, a threat to the home and everyone in it.

The proposed change in the law however does not automatically give the householder a licence to kill or injure any intruder who breaks into the home. The response must be proportionate to the threat. We will all still have an obligation to only use reasonable force in the circumstances as we perceive them to be.

in conversation with Brenda McNally