There are two points I should like to raise. If one is living in the country, in the rural parts of Ireland, one appreciates how close the district court comes to the daily lives of the people, and how important it is that there should be ready access to it. In some areas, in any case, the court meets every second month, and in some places every month. I should like to know from the Minister is there a clear and statutory duty on the district justice to hold the court on the day appointed, or is it within the discretion of the district justice to hold it or not as he thinks best?
If the date is fixed for the district court it ought to be held. The district justice should be there and hold his court. If he is not, he ought to arrange for some other district justice to attend. The casual cancellation of court sessions is something to be greatly deplored.
Is it not fundamentally unsound to appoint temporary judicial persons? We all recognise it is not possible always legitimately to adhere to the ideal principle that nobody should sit upon the bench unless he has full judicial tenure. We are all familiar in systems of legal administration similar to our own that where criminal lists become heavily congested commissioners are sometimes sent out to help in clearing up the list.
Is it not a sound general principle that if a person is appointed to judicial office either in the district court, circuit court or High Court he should hold that office by the special terms of tenure laid down by our legislation which give him a high degree of independence of the Executive? I can remember this point arising on occasions when I was a member of the Government. The general view then was that even at some expense it was better to appoint one permanent justice too many so as to have a man in reserve to fill any vacancy that might unexpectedly arise than to depend on a system of appointing temporary district justices.
It was felt that the system of appointing temporary district justices opened the way to the possibility of the abuse that the Executive—whatever Executive it was—might appoint temporary justices almost on probation and that if, in that probationary period of temporary appointment, they did not bring in verdicts of the kind the Executive wanted they would be tacitly fixed with notice that they would not be appointed to such temporary posts in the future and that their prospects of permanent appointment would be remote. That is a danger. I believe the sound principle is that if you intend to put a man on the bench whether in the district court, circuit court or High Court he ought to be there on the terms prescribed in our legislation and under the Constitution which are designed to secure for any judicial person the maximum security of tenure so that he can do full justice to any person appearing in the court, particularly when that person is appearing in criminal proceedings where the State is a party to the proceedings.
The district court is very close to the people's lives. It is probably a good thing that the procedure of the district court should be friendly and informal and attuned to the mind of the locality in which it sits. I suggest that can be carried too far. Inevitably the Garda and the State Solicitor who perennially appear before the district court are more familiar with its proceedings than the average individual who may once or twice in his lifetime be called to meet a charge in such a form.
It is manifestly important, in such a court which now has a pretty wide jurisdiction in rural Ireland, that the ordinary citizen should be fully reassured in his mind that the district justice stands not only as a judge but as a protector of the individual against any attempt by the Executive or its agents to trespass upon his rights. Therefore, it should not only be true but it should be made daily manifest that, no matter how humble the citizen who is brought before the court may be, the obligation remains upon the State to prove to the court that he is guilty before he can be convicted.
Many people forget that under our system of law it is not only necessary that a man should be guilty in order to convict him but he must be proved to be guilty. We all know that many guilty persons may go unconvicted because the State fails to prove their guilt. When we get to the level of the district court, functioning in a very small social unit, it is a fact that minor crime in a small country town, village or townland rarely goes long undetected. Within forty-eight hours most of the neighbours know who did it. It does not always follow that the Garda authorities or anybody else is in a position to produce to a court of law satisfactory proof of guilt. That is what our legal system requires the representative of the Executive to do.
It is very important that everybody should be reassured that just as much in the district court as in the circuit court or in the Central Criminal Court, the State will be required to discharge the burden of proof that the law puts upon it. That is something the Minister might with advantage discuss with the Garda and with the Attorney General so as to refresh everybody's mind that, even if we know that it was the itinerant tinker who stole the pair of trousers off the hedge, the obligation to prove that in court still remains before he is convicted. Although it may be the itinerant tinker who is summarily convicted on public belief rather than strict legal proof, today, if that principle were to be generally accepted as an appropriate procedure, the rest of us might receive similar summary treatment thereafter.
While it is urgent to ensure that that careful procedure is followed, it is doubly urgent to ensure that everybody knows and sees that it is being followed. That, I think, requires that the district justices, bearing that in mind, will be scrupulous to avoid even the appearance of contact with the Garda before hearing criminal charges in their own courts. Even though there is no improper discussion of cases by the Garda and the justice, the all-important thing is to preserve, clear and certain, in the minds of the people that the district justice comes to their community not only as a judge but as the protector of each individual's rights against the Executive and that a highly important part of his function as a district justice of an area is to insist on the Garda authorities discharging to the full their obligation of proving guilt before they can expect a conviction of any person brought before the court.
