Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)

It might be accepted too. I am glad to hear views emerge around an approach that is important, namely, that we formulate an approach that will stop people accused of serious charges being acquitted on purely technical grounds.

The Tánaiste mentioned the original Kenny case. It is interesting that in that case the accused was charged with possession of drugs found as a result of a search of his house. The discovery of the drugs was the essential, core point. However, there was an obtuse discussion as to whether there were reasonable grounds for the issuing of the warrant signed by the peace commissioner. How ludicrous could it be? Significant also was that the trial judge held the warrant was valid and the Court of Criminal Appeal, which I presume comprised three judges, ruled that it may not have been valid but that the evidence was nonetheless admissible on the grounds that there was not a conscious or deliberate violation of the constitutional rights of the accused. At that stage, four judges were in favour of conviction.

The case then went to the Supreme Court where there was a three to two verdict. Of the nine judges who considered the case, six of them were in favour of conviction. However, because of the way we do our business, the three-two decision of the Supreme Court meant the evidence was not admitted. Somebody caught red-handed in possession of drugs was able to get away. That is the background to this issue.

The foreground to this issue is a recent case of a famous or an infamous nature with which we had to deal through a committee of the House. Again, the public was scandalised that evidence, which was clearly there in respect of a computer and otherwise, could not be admitted because of a defect raised in regard to the search warrant, namely, whether the seizure took place 12 hours before or after the expiry of the search warrant. We need to change this.

I am cognisant of the points raised by the Tánaiste. In advance, I am preparing to accept an instalment of his support for a change along the lines he suggested. It is probably the right approach. If there is difficulty in regard to the constitutional aspects, let us introduce a Bill covering this rule as soon as possible in the next Dáil and, if necessary, let it be referred to the Supreme Court. Some of the points made in this House will be referred to when the matter goes before the Supreme Court. On that basis, I will not press the issue further.

See this speech in context