Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 26 Feb 1991

Vol. 405 No. 6

Adjournment Debate. - Drunk-Driving Prosecutions.

Mr. McCartan

The problem of combating drunk driving is as old as driving itself. The advent of speedier vehicles and faster roads has made the problem more acute. The yearly carnage on our roads related to drink and drunk driving is unacceptable and must be tackled. One of the most effective methods of combating drunk driving is criminal prosecution. Unfortunately, this device has not been used to best effect. The recent intensification of Garda action against drunk driving is a welcome indication that there is a change in public attitude to this crime and, especially, that there is a change of attitude among those who often demand strong law and order but are prepared to turn a blind eye to someone driving home from the local pub or club well over the limit.

Unfortunately the same change of attitude has not yet become evident in the Oireachtas, as illustrated by the recent and shameful case where an important protection in our Constitution was invoked as a device to avoid prosecution. Also, we as legislators have failed to act to make prosecutions more simple and relevant. The absence of a modern criminal evidence Act led to the disgraceful decision in the recent case of the Director of Public Prosecutions v. Haughey where a prosecution failed because a doctor was too ill to attend and to attest to his signature on an unchallenged document and to confirm his status as a registered medical practitioner. This weakness in the law was evident long before the particular case exposed it. The soft attitude of this House reaches further. It has the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions in its grip. The decisions of our courts again often lack any understanding or comprehension of the extent of the damage and injury caused by these drunk drivers. Two recent cases illustrate this point. On 16 July 1989 Tony Kelly was crossing the main road at Annesley Bridge——

An Ceann Comhairle

Sorry, the Chair must deprecate reference to particular cases. The Deputy appreciates fully that we ought not to refer to persons outside this House. They have no redress against accusations or reflections made upon them by this privileged Assembly. I ask the Deputy to desist from reference to individual persons or cases.

Mr. McCartan

I should have prefaced it by saying the late Tony Kelly. I should say to the Chair that I respect the expressed wishes, in fact request, of his widow to raise the unfortunate circumstances of the case in the House. However, I am bound by the ruling of the Chair and I will not persist.

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes, Deputy, on what is a long standing procedure in this House.

Mr. McCartan

In his case, nonetheless, the circumstances amounted to a citizen of this city being killed by a speeding driver who left the scene of the accident, was pursued on foot, apprehended by an off duty garda, brought back to the scene, found to be driving with excess alcohol and then brought before the court and prosecuted. In the District Court the driver received a three month sentence, reduced to a fine of £200 by the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court. I wrote to the Director of Public Prosecutions in April of last year inquiring why a charge of dangerous driving causing death had not been preferred in the case. The Director of Public Prosecutions replied at the conclusion of the criminal prosecution in February of this year indicating that he was,"precluded from giving reasons".

The second case I wish to refer to was well documented by the columnist Kevin Myers in The Irish Times of 20 February last. In that case, again a fatal one, a man appeared before Wicklow Circuit Court charged with careless driving and drunk driving——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy should not refer to cases in which the persons may be identifiable.

Mr. McCartan

Again, I am sorry. It was written in the public newspaper.

An Ceann Comhairle

That may be so. I am not concerned about what happens outside this House.

Mr. McCartan

In that instance the defendant ultimately left court bearing a fine of £700 though it was his second conviction for drunk driving. The ridiculousness of these decisions is well illustrated when compared with the conviction of the Irish Family Planning Association for selling a condom in the Virgin Megastore without a licence.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is bringing in extraneous matter now.

Mr. N. Treacy

Very extraneous.

Mr. McCartan

By way of comparison, that fine today was increased from £500 to £600. These issues have been raised with the Government by Mothers Against Drunken Driving and their manifesto was presented to the Minister for Justice in September 1989. Since then no amending legislation has been introduced or other action taken by the Government. Their demands should be responded to. They suggest a charge of dangerous driving causing death should be preferred and be allowed to be decided upon by a court of trial whenever death occurs through danger or drunk driving or both. If the law needs to be amended or improved in this area the Minister should act upon it. The present position is unsatisfactory.

The group suggest that a reduction of blood alcohol limit, as recommended by the EC, to a level of 80 milligrams per 100 millilitres should be introduced. This requires amending legislation. The third suggestion concerns the right of the family or representative of the deceased person to be consulted or advised of the prosecution of these offences and to be heard on their behalf in a court of trial imposing sentence. Again, I believe amending legislation from the Minister is required.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will bring his remarks to a close.

Mr. McCartan

I reiterate for the umpteenth time that we are in bad need of an up-to-date criminal evidence Act that will make prosecutions in this area, and generally in the criminal law, easier and better able to be handled so that justice will be done in all cases in our courts.

Minister of State at the Department of Justice (Mr. N. Treacy)

Before I deal with the specific demands of the Mothers Against Drunken Driving group, I want to make a few general comments.

The prosecution of offenders, and the conduct and outcome of court cases, as Deputy McCartan well knows, is not a matter for the Minister for Justice. The prosecution authorities — the Garda authorities and/or the Director of Public Prosecutions — are responsible for deciding the charges which are preferred in drunk driving cases. I have no function in relation to the matter and it would be wholly improper for me, or the Minister for Justice, to comment or to interfere in any way with this process. As regard the sentences imposed by the courts in specific cases, it is not normal practice for the Minister for Justice to comment on these. I do not propose to depart from this long-standing practice. I can, however, reassure this House that the Garda authorities intend to maintain with unremitting vigour their campaign to stamp out drunk driving and to bring offenders before the courts in this respect.

In regard to the prosecution of drink driving cases where a death has resulted special revised procedures have recently been put in place by the Garda authorities and the Director of Public Prosecutions. Those procedures were established following consultations between officials of my Department, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Garda authorities at a very senior level and the receipt of legal advice by my Department. For obvious reasons I cannot go into all the details of these new procedures, but I can confirm a number of them, for instance, all decisions on traffic accident cases involving a fatality are now taken by the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Garda instructions on responding to indications of excessive alcohol consumption by drivers have also been revised. For instance a special procedure has been decided on to deal with attempted dodges, such as feigning an injury by motorists who seek to avoid being brought to the station to give a blood or urine sample. Where necessary, the gardaí now accompany the motorists involved in an accident to the hospital where there is a doubt as to the seriousness of their alleged injuries. In this way, if the hospital discharges the motorist within a reasonable period, he or she may then he arrested and brought to the station to give a sample. Even where it is not possible to make an arrest or obtain a blood or urine sample from a motorist involved in a fatal accident case the gardaí go to great lengths to establish the facts.

It would be inappropriate for me to be specific in this regard, but I can assure Deputy McCartan and the House that in a number of recent cases the gardaí through exhaustive research and detective work, established to the satisfaction of the court the inebriated condition of the driver in a fatal accident case and secured appropriate convictions in this respect. I can assure this House that the Garda devote considerable attention to investigating fatal accident cases where drink is involved. The utmost diligence is applied by them in the presentation in court of the facts in such cases.

Turning to the demands made by the Mothers Against Drunken Driving, I propose to deal with these seriatim. The first demand is that a charge of dangerous driving causing death to be preferred where the facts warrant a dangerous driving simpliciter charge and the driving caused a death. It is the Director of Public Prosecutions who decides what charges are preferred in any such case and we in this House cannot gainsay his independence.

The second demand is that a mandatory custodial sentence be imposed where a conviction is secured. This is a legislative matter for the Minister for the Environment to consider, but the Deputy will be aware that the Judiciary are deeply opposed to legislation which ties their hands in determining sentences. The third demand is that there should be compulsory blood tests on suspected drunk drivers who end up in hospital. I can confirm that this proposal is under consideration by the Minister for the Environment. The other more administrative-type recommendations by MADD are also being studied by the Minister for the Environment. Proposals to have the legal representative of a deceased victim involved in the prosecution would represent a major departure in our criminal law and practice and I have to be candid with the Deputy in saying that such a change is not being contemplated.

I agree with Deputy McCartan that a number of technical loopholes on the evidential side require to be addressed and this will be done at the earliest opportunity.

Drunk driving is a serious crime. Unfortunately, we as a nation have not in the past been strong enough in our condemnation of this crime, or in our efforts to stamp it out. I am entirely supportive of the efforts of organisations such as the Mothers Against Drunken Driving which, together with the various agencies involved, have put the public spotlight on drink driving and given a clear message that drink driving is no longer socially acceptable. To conclude, may I give the Deputy, and the House, one statistic? Since last December, prosecutions have commenced against 1,000 drivers for drink driving offences. This is proof of the determination of the Garda authorities to tackle this evil head on.