Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)

I move amendment No. 139:

In page 71, before line 1, to insert the following:

106. (1) A duly completed statement purporting to have been supplied under section 102(2) is, until the contrary is shown, sufficient evidence in any proceedings under this Chapter, of the facts stated therein, without proof of any signature on it or that the signatory was the proper person to sign it, and shall, until the contrary is shown, be sufficient evidence of compliance by the member of the Garda Síochána concerned with the requirements imposed on him or her by or under this Chapter prior to and in connection with the supply by him or her under section 102(2) of such statement.

(2) A duly completed form under section 103(1) is, until the contrary is shown, sufficient evidence in any proceedings under this Chapter of the facts stated therein, without proof of any signature on it or that the signatory was the proper person to sign it, and shall, until the contrary is shown, be sufficient evidence of compliance by the designated medical practitioner concerned with the requirements imposed on him or her by or under this Chapter.

(3) A certificate expressed to have been issued under section 104 is, until the contrary is shown, sufficient evidence in any proceedings under this Part of the facts stated therein, without proof of any signature on it or that the signatory was the proper person to sign it, and shall, until the contrary is shown, be sufficient evidence of compliance by the Bureau with the requirements imposed on it by or under this Chapter.

(4) In a prosecution for an offence under section 96, it shall be presumed, until the contrary is shown, that each of the following persons is a designated medical practitioner—

(a) a person who by virtue of powers conferred on him or her by this Part took from another person a specimen of that other person's blood or was provided by another person with a specimen of that other person's urine,

(b) a person for whom, following a requirement under section 99(1) or 100(1) to permit the taking by him of a specimen of blood, there was a refusal or failure to give such permission or to comply with a requirement of his or her in relation to the taking of such a specimen,

(c) a person for whom, following a requirement under section 99(1) or 100(1) to provide for him or her a specimen of urine, there was a refusal or failure to provide such a specimen or to comply with a requirement of his or her in relation to the provision of such a specimen.

(5) Where, pursuant to section 99 or 100 a designated medical practitioner states in writing that he or she is unwilling, on medical grounds, to take from a person a specimen of his or her blood or be provided by him or her with a specimen of his or her urine, the statement signed by the medical practitioner is, in any proceedings under this Part, sufficient evidence, until the contrary is shown, of the facts stated therein, without proof of any signature on it or that the signatory was the proper person to sign it.

See this speech in context