Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank People Before Profit for introducing this Bill. Clearly, a new way is needed for the State’s drug policy. A report of the justice committee last year recommended a policy of decriminalisation be pursued in line with emerging international best practice in respect of the possession of drugs for personal consumption through appropriate legislative reform in favour of a health-led approach to problem drug use. The final report of the citizens’ assembly was split. It does not go so far as to call for possession to be totally decriminalised or for the repeal of the Misuse of Drugs Act but it gives a decision back to the Oireachtas saying that possession of controlled drugs would remain illegal, changes are likely to be required to the Misuse of Drugs Act in conjunction with the enhanced use of probation, etc. and that new legislation may also be required. In my view, an overhaul of the Misuse of Drugs Act is probably necessary. The recommendation continues that the citizens assembly “views it as the responsibility of the Oireachtas, informed by legal advice and detailed pre-legislative scrutiny, to determine the most appropriate legal mechanisms to achieve this goal".

My personal view is the consequences of criminalising mostly younger men is vastly disproportionate to the act which has led to the charge. Potentially career-ending consequences and limitations on travel from even a charge which is unproven or does not result in a conviction being applied is not the fairest or most just way to deal with people smoking cannabis. I saw in my own career people being charged with pieces left on a grinder, traces of cannabis of less than even 1 g. My experience has been that this system often led to young, often vulnerable men, being pressurised into providing information on potentially dangerous individuals to avoid a charge or conviction. This, at least, causes further stress. There was mention of the powers under the Misuse of Drugs Act in relation to detention. There can be no other conclusion but that it is often used in a random fashion. For years, the offence of simple possession was excluded from the adult caution scheme but even since it was included, the amount of charges remain high. My figures are that there were 5,900 for 2021. I had not seen the 2022 figures but I would be interested in looking at those.

However, at the same time, I have met people - family members - who say that as a result of taking drugs and with the increased potency of cannabis, there is a danger to young people, again, particularly to young men. A one-size-fits-all approach cannot succeed.

The Bill proposes to amend section 3 to make the possession of up to 7 g of cannabis lawful provided that the circumstances are such that a reasonable inference can be drawn that the drugs are for the personal use of the individual. Section 3 of this Bill places the burden of proof, strangely, on the defendant then rather than the State. Last year, the Supreme Court struck down other laws that placed the onus of proof on the defendant so it is a very tricky area. Placing the onus on the defendants means that they will obviously be already before the court and may be obliged to give evidence. Any further inroads into the right to silence should be approached with extreme caution.

However, the amount of 7 g suggested seems comparable with international norms. Malta, for instance, uses a similar yardstick but what is more problematic may be the reasonable inference. Could it be more prudent for the Bill to provide that no prosecution would be initiated or maintained if the amount was below a certain threshold and there is no evidence the person is dealing, rather than saying that it shall be lawful? Is this apropos of the defence or of a request or command to the DPP not to prosecute? This can all be teased out later.

One suggestion is that no proceedings should be brought and another suggestion is that in proceedings relating to this amount, the onus would be on the defendant to prove something. Another potential issue is that in one section of the Bill to amend section 3 refers to a person over the age of 18 years so how does it apply to somebody who is 17?

The Bill is clearly not the finished product. Sinn Féin has approached this debate with an open mind to see if the issues, both positive and negative, can be teased out on Committee Stage. A special Oireachtas committee has been recommended. As legislators it is now our job to listen to the decision of the citizen's assembly and to implement solutions. At this point there are wider considerations than just criminal law and my colleagues, Deputies Gould and Ward, have also undertaken extensive work in the fields of mental health, rehabilitation and the treatment of addiction. The current legislative framework is far from perfect but we need to see health impact and other assessments.

See this speech in context