When this Bill was being considered yesterday I was asked to look into the question, whether the words occurring in Section 6, sub-section 1, "having regard to the merits of the case" were useful or necessary in the context. It was suggested that inasmuch as the section mentions "Where, before trial, or at any stage of a trial, it appears to the court that the indictment is defective, the court shall make such order for the amendment," and inasmuch as the words "before trial" occur that the expression "having regard to the merits of the case," is somewhat anomalous, as the court would not have very much knowledge of the merits of the case before it had actually started hearing it. I am advised the words "having regard to the merits of the case" need not be taken as qualifying the words "before trial," but refer rather to the words that come after them, "or at any stage of a trial." On the whole, perhaps it would be better to leave the section as it stands. That would be a matter of opinion. We regard the words that are objected to, or called in question, as practically equivalent thereto "in all the circumstances," rather than referring too literally to the actual merits of the matter in dispute.
PUBLIC BUSINESS. - CRIMINAL JUSTICE (ADMINISTRATION) BILL, 1924—FOURTH STAGE.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
Unfortunately, the words compel the judge to have regard solely to the merits of the case. It is not to the circumstance but to its merits. That is the only condition that he can have regard to. He cannot have regard to circumstances unless they affect the merits. I think it is a pity, and I am sure there will be trouble over it. I think the sub-section could be very easily amended. I cannot understand what they are wanted for at all. If you put in "unless the required amendment cannot in the opinion of the court be made without injustice," that would cover every conceivable case.
They cover everything that ought to be covered. I suggested to the Minister that he will probably get into trouble with this section.
The words are contained in the British Act for nine years, and I am not aware that any particular trouble has arisen with regard to them. I see that it would be a question of interpretation, and I see the possibilities that An Cathaoirleach refers to.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
I may say for my countrymen from experience of both that they have a greater ingenuity to discover points in courts of justice than they have on the other side of the Channel. They have a more subtle brain in that direction.
I would not object to the alteration suggested either by Senator Brown or by you, sir.
Amendment—"Section 6, sub-section (1), line 5, to omit the words `having regard to the merits of the case,' and substitute therefor `in the opinion of the court' "—put and agreed to.
SECTION 13.
The following Government amendments were put and agreed to:—
1. Section 13. Immediately after the word "Court" in line 34 to insert the words "or a Peace Commissioner."
2. Section 13. At the end of line 41 and within the bracket to insert the words "or a Peace Commissioner."
3. Section 13. Immediately after the word "Justice" in line 54 to insert the words "or a Peace Commissioner."
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
In the same section, lines 60 and 61, there is a Government amendment to insert before the word "indictment" the words "such charge or." I understand that that was agreed to yesterday, so that it is not necessary to put it now.
Very good, sir.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
That is to say, the House understands that we are inserting in lines 60 and 61 before the word "indictment" the words "such charge or," and leaving out the words "by the Attorney-General of Saorstát Eireann"; so that the sentence will then run: "and plead to such charge or indictment as may be preferred against them." The next amendment is also to Section 13, to add at the end of the section the words: "(The foregoing condition may be adapted as circumstances may require).” That is a Government amendment also, and it is proposed to put it in at the end of the section?
Yes, sir.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
Is not that a little awkward. Would it not be better, Mr. O'Higgins, to put it in at the beginning? "Every recognisance entered into by way of appeal before a District Justice shall be in the following form, or in such similar form as may suit the circumstances."
I think that would be better.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
The amendment is to omit the words "that is to say," and insert "or in such similar form as the circumstances may require."