asked the Minister for Justice the procedure followed by the Garda Síochána with regard to the return of stolen property to its proven rightful owner, and the period of time which in general elapses between identification of the rightful owner and the return of the property; and if he will take steps to expedite this procedure for the return of stolen property.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Return of Stolen Property.
94.
Where criminal proceedings are taken against a person in respect of the stealing of property the Garda Síochána apply to the court for an Order for its disposal. It is usually necessary to await the outcome of the criminal proceedings, and the expiry of the period for the lodging of an appeal, before the court can be asked to make the Order, as the property may be required by the court as evidence. In the case of perishable property, however, it is the practice to ask the court to make an Order even though the criminal proceedings have not terminated.
Apart from the fact that production of the property in court may be necessary, there is frequently a difficulty about conclusive identification. Certain kinds of property, including money and items such as cigarettes, are seldom positively identifiable and to accept that identity had been conclusively established in such cases could be tantamount to assuming the guilt of the accused person before he has been tried. However, where it is clearly established that there is only one claimant, it is generally possible to have the property handed over to him on his undertaking that it will be preserved until the court has disposed of the case.
Where no criminal proceedings are taken and there is only one claimant to the property and he satisfies the Garda that his claim is well founded, they hand the property over to him. Otherwise, they apply to the court for an Order.
The period that elapses before the property is delivered to the person claiming to be the owner varies with the particular circumstances of each case, and depends primarily on the length of time the criminal proceedings take. An average figure could be obtained only by an examination of a great many individual files and I do not think it could serve any purpose.
The possibility of taking steps to improve the position from the point of view of the owner of stolen property has been examined on several occasions but, owing to the double problem of the need to have the property as evidence and the frequent difficulty of establishing conclusive identification in advance of the court's decision on the criminal charges, it has not been found feasible to make any significant change. As matters stand, where the Gardaí have possession of perishable stolen property or property that appears to have been positively identified, they submit an immediate report to the local State Solicitor, so that the question whether the property can be returned in such circumstances is considered on its merits by the law officers in each individual case.
Will the Minister say, if the information given the House is correct, why a person about whom I wrote to the Department of Justice several weeks ago and whose property was stolen several years ago has not yet got his property back, although the person who stole it has been in prison for almost two years?
I have no information about that in this file. It may be that there was more than one claimant for the property.
Even if there is more than one claimant, can the Minister explain why it should take several years to decide who owns cigarettes and other things after the person who has been convicted of stealing them admits he stole them from a certain party?
I think the best thing I can do is to ask the Minister to answer that.
Yes, ask the Minister to answer my letter.