asked the Minister for Justice whether this country has agreed to the proposal of the European Council of Human Rights that persons should no longer be imprisoned for bad debts; and, if so, whether this provision has yet been brought into effect here.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Imprisonment for Debt.
47.
The provision to which the question appears to refer, and which has been accepted by this country, is in Article 1 of the Fourth Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The Article reads as follows:
No one shall be deprived of his liberty merely on the ground of inability to fulfil a contractual obligation.
That principle has long since been accepted in Irish law. An order by the court to pay a debt is made only after the debtor has been given the opportunity to show that he cannot pay or can pay only by instalments. Even then, by virtue of paragraph (c) of Section 6 of the Enforcement of Court Orders Act, 1940, the court is prohibited from ordering the improsonment of a debtor who appears before it and shows that his failure to pay, in accordance with an instalment order granted by the court, was due neither to his wilful refusal nor to his culpable neglect.
Does the Minister consider that principle is fully honoured in the power vested in the Revenue Commissioners to imprison a person against whom they allege they have a claim for arrears of taxation?
I am not clear as to which particular power the Deputy is referring. Any questions about the Revenue Commissioners should be addressed to my senior colleague, the Minister for Finance.
I am referring to the principle.
48.
asked the Minister for Justice whether it is normal practice for a husband to be imprisoned for debts contracted by his wife without either his knowledge or consent; and, if so, if he will introduce legislation to alter this practice.
The law provides that a husband is not liable for the debts incurred by his wife except where she is acting as his agent.
Mr. Ryan
Is the Minister satisfied that the law is adequate at present, having regard to the fact that a number of husbands have found themselves in danger of imprisonment because their wives bought unnecessary electrical equipment at the door from smart salesmen?
The administration of the Hire Purchase Act is a matter for the Minister for Industry and Commerce. However, I would say that those Deputies who have improvident wives are fully protected by the fact that they are not liable unless their wives are acting as their agents.