asked the Minister for Justice the number of prosecutions in (a) 1984 and (b) 1985 for driving while over the alcohol limit; and the outcome in each of these cases.
Ceisteanna—Questions Oral Answers. - Drunk Driving Prosecutions.
6.
The information sought is as follows:
|
1984 |
1985 |
|
|
No. of offences in which proceedings were taken. |
6,769 |
6,055 |
|
Charges withdrawn or dismissed |
251 |
262 |
|
Number of Convictions |
5,135 |
4,944 |
|
Charges proved and Order made without Conviction |
Nil |
Nil |
|
*Adjourned or otherwise disposed of |
1,383 |
849 |
*The last category includes cases which had not been concluded at the end of the relevant accounting period.
In view of the fact that a driver could feel quite capable of driving and could be over the limit without being aware of it, is the Minister anxious to make available facilities for self testing? Does the Minister consider that the system is fair in the absence of the opportunity for drivers to self test their alcohol level?
I consider the system fair. I recognise that there is a certain body of opinion which takes the line that Deputy Mitchell started off with. In any case of this kind no matter where one draws the line there will be cases on one side or the other that are possibly marginal. I do not have any official view — I will put it no stronger than that — on the question of self testing. I do not think that justice requires that we make any specific provision for self testing.
Does the Minister have any plans to extend the regulations to testing for excessive use of other drugs while driving, either drugs which are prescribed or drugs which are being abused in view of the availability of these drugs at present?
Deputy Mitchell knows that alcohol is not the only drug the abuse of which can lead to proceedings. There are offences that are concerned with driving while under the influence of an intoxicant, which can be alcohol or which can equally be a number of other preparations. There are some difficulties in relation to other drugs in devising tests that would reveal the presence of those drugs. I am not in a position to say whether any new developments can be expected on that front but it is a problem that is receiving some attention.
Is the Minister aware that prosecutions for drunken driving have been bedevilled in recent times by technicalities on the issue of summonses, particularly during the current year and last year, as a result of signing difficulties by District Court clerks and computer problems, and that many hundreds of these cases are now being dismissed or cannot be dealt with? Does he have any proposals to simplify the procedures in order to get around these technicalities?
I do not have proposals to simplify the procedures because they are not very complicated as, I think, the Deputy will agree. What I am anxious to do is to ensure that those involved observe the procedures, relatively uncomplicated as they are.
Is the Minister aware of the number of High Court decisions which are at present under appeal to the Supreme Court dealing with the procedures on the issues of summonses which are relatively complicated when the procedures involving complaints and issue of summonses, dates and District Court clerks are taken into account? They are complicated enough to become the subject of High Court and Supreme Court decisions. At present the system is not working, certainly in the greater Dublin area. All these are in a state of abeyance and will clog up the system for a long time even after the situation is resolved in the Supreme Court. Does the Minister not regard it as an emergency that would warrant bringing in a quick amending Bill to resolve these technicalities so that the procedures can get moving again and these things can be dealt with?
As I said, I do not regard the procedings as being particularly complicated. I think it essential however that those involved operate them properly. I am sure the Deputy will agree with me when I suggest that a complicated procedure is not necessarily needed to give rise to litigation in the High Court.