Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)

This amendment proposes the removal of section 20 from the Bill. Section 20 as it currently stands deletes section 20(4) of the Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act 1851. This section requires the District Court judge to take or cause to be taken a note of the evidence when required to do so. In 2006, some 560,155 cases were heard by the District Court. The vast majority of the cases heard in the District Court are summary, carrying a fine rather than a custodial sentence. The ability of a District Court judge to proceed through the large number of cases required to keep on top of his or her list of cases would be greatly reduced if section 20(4) of the Petty Sessions Ireland Act 1851 were strictly observed.

As matters stand, I understand District Court judges do not in practice keep a note of the evidence for a number of reasons, not least of which is the sheer impracticality of attempting to do so. Were District Court judges to perform this function, the activity would have a detrimental effect on their ability to hear cases.

Deputy O'Shea fairly conceded that a District Court decision is subject to a right of appeal by way of full rehearing in the Circuit Court so there is no prejudice to the litigant before the Circuit Court in not having a note of the evidence. The Deputy referred to the position regarding a case stated. However, it is my understanding that the District Court judge draws up a case stated in consultation with the parties when there is a case stated to the High Court. In effect, the judge prepares a form of what happened before him or her for the purposes of the exercise of his or her legal review powers by the High Court.

It is difficult to see what the generation of a note would achieve. The advice of the Attorney General is that this requirement is superfluous because every appeal of a decision of the District Court is by way of a complete rehearing in the Circuit Court. In fact, section 14(1) of the Courts Act 1971 provides that in any legal proceedings regard shall not be had to any record relating to a decision of a judge of the District Court in any case of summary jurisdiction. This means that even if a note had been kept of the evidence in the District Court, it would not be used in the appeal. Instead, the case must be completely reheard and the original note cannot be brought into the picture. I assume this provision was made to ensure the number of District Court appeals to the Circuit Court is not endless. It is clear the requirement set out in the 1851 Act is, as a matter of practice, no longer implemented in modern circumstances.

Deputy O'Shea referred to general jurisprudence. It is important to note that it is intended to roll out digital audio recording in a number of phases, starting with the criminal courts where cases are brought on indictment, followed by the civil and family law courts in Dublin and, subsequently, by Circuit Court and District Court locations throughout the country. In other words, at the end of the programme of work, all courts in all jurisdictions will have digital audio recording implemented.

The provisional timescale for the roll-out of digital audio recording is as follows. It is hoped to have all courts, except the District Court, covered by about March of 2009. It is then proposed to roll out digital audio recording in all District Courts, although some District Courts will be covered earlier because they are co-located with a Circuit Court or family law venue. The Courts Service is not anxious to revisit a building to install further equipment and under its plan, all locations will be covered by the end of 2009.

The current plan is scheduled to start in March of this year. In July, category 1, that is, the Circuit Courts, Special Criminal Court and Central Criminal Court, will begin to have digital audio recording installed. Following completion of this phase, digital audio recording will be installed in the civil and family law courts. The final phase will be implementation of digital audio recording in category 3, that is, all District Courts not covered by earlier roll-outs.

I am glad of the opportunity provided by the amendment to point out that the programme of digital audio recording is a fundamental change in the operation of the courts. As Deputies are aware, at present a transcript is maintained in criminal and certain other proceedings. In general, a note must be taken by practitioners of other proceedings before the courts and evidence in them. Under the system of digital audio recording, a complete record of everything that happens in court will be kept in every court. This will be a valuable innovation which will allow us to reconsider the systems of appeal that obtain in the courts at present and enable us to put any system related to judicial conduct on a firm basis.

See this speech in context