There is provision in sections 72 and 73 for seizure and detention by gardaí and authorised persons of various things for use in a subsequent prosecution. Section 77 enables a person whose property has been so seized to appeal to the District Court. The court may either confirm the detention or direct that the property be returned to the owner with suitable compensation, costs and expenses to be paid by the Minister. The provision is in line with modern concepts of the rights of the individual and will ensure that authorised persons or gardaí exercising their powers under the Bill, will not act frivolously or irresponsibly.
SECTION 77.
Question proposed: "That section 77 stand part of the Bill."
Does the Minister see this as a necessary provision against injustice?
It is an added safeguard. Court cases may not come up for some time—there might be a delay of two or three months even in the District Court. Some person might feel that his property might be seized unreasonably and this gives him an opportunity to bring his case before the courts.
This section may be in conformity with usual procedure but it appears to be restricting the discretion the district justice might have if it is technically proved that it was properly seized.
That is the only question at issue here—whether it was properly seized. The words "if he is satisfied" give the court discretion.
He has discretion?
"Discretion" may not be the right word; but he is either satisfied or he is not.
I concede the Minister is right for once.
Question put and agreed to.