Special Committee Defence Bill, 1951 díospóireacht -
Thursday, 1 May 1952

SECTION 270.

Captain Cowan

I move amendment No. 308 :—

In sub-section (1), paragraph (b), line 28, to delete " without due authority " and substitute " wilfully and unlawfully ".

This is somewhat the same principle. The section creates offences in relation to manœuvres. Sub-paragraph (b) of sub-section 1 provides that " if, within the area and during the period specified in a Manœuvres (Authorisation) Order authorising military manœuvres, any person without due authority enters or remains in any camp or billet or any place where any guns, vehicles, ammunition, supplies or other material used for the purposes of the manœuvres are stored he shall be guilty of an offence ". I want to delete the words " without due authority " and to say " wilfully and unlawfully ". If he wilfully and unlawfully obstructs, it is an offence under sub-paragraph (a). I want to make it an offence under (b) if he enters or remains wilfully or unlawfully. Suppose a person walks into a camp where a part of the forces is on manœuvres. He has no authority to go in—he is just curious—but he commits an offence. No matter what part of the country we go to, if soldiers are in camp, people will go in and have a chat. If he simply has no authority to go in it should not be an offence but if he does it wilfully and unlawfully, it is an offence.

Chairman

The old trouble of security again arises here. A person might go in to sabotage, to plan a raid or for some such purpose. There are all sorts of problems that can arise.

Mr. Collins

A person's innocent curiosity may be serious in its consequences.

Chairman

That is another angle. It is again a security problem and the power is not likely to be abused, although when that argument is put forward I am usually the very first to jump on it. Here we are dealing with security and when dealing with security you have to go a certain distance.

Mr. Traynor

It is correct to say that in (a) of sub-section (1) the words " wilfully and unlawfully " are used where it says " wilfully and unlawfully obstructs or interferes with the execution of the manœuvres ". There is, however, a distinction between the two paragraphs. Sub-section (1) (b) again deals with something in the nature of a trespass and I am advised that the words " wilfully and unlawfully " are rather restricted and unsuitable in relation to such an offence. What is wanted is a prohibition on entering such places as these, except under proper authority.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment No. 309 not moved.

Section 270 agreed to.

Sections 271 to 277 inclusive, agreed to.