Seanad debates

Tuesday, 6 July 2004

Commissions of Investigation Bill 2003: Committee Stage.

 

5:00 pm

Photo of Brian HayesBrian Hayes (Fine Gael)

I move amendment No. 17:

In page 13, subsection (2), line 2, after "shall" to insert "in so far as is practicable,".

This section refers to the duty to inform witnesses of the commission's powers and to advise them of their own rights and obligations. It is important that the commission does this concerning any person who is asked to co-operate with and give evidence to the commission. However, helpful as ever, Fine Gael is attempting to make the Bill as watertight as possible. Amendment No. 17 proposes a form of words which would make the Bill more acceptable to the commission on a day to day practical level.

Legal eagles will scrutinise this legislation once it is passed. The first commission will be established and opinions will be advanced on how the commission has not performed its functions and has been in dereliction of its duties. Acceptance of amendment No. 17 would do a great service to the commission. We suggest in section 13(2) that if no legal representative is present to advise a witness, the commission shall in so far as is practicable advise the witness of his or her legal rights and obligations while giving evidence on oath or affirmation. That would make the subsection more watertight and is more straightforward. Rather than imposing sweeping obligations on the commission in the Bill we should be more precise. I predict that people will run to the High Court as soon as the commission is in operation, looking for glitches, shortcomings and the kind of sweeping obligations contained in section 13(2). I am not asking for a major concession but this would certainly make my day. I respectfully suggest that if the Minister of State were to accept this amendment he would help the commission to go about its work in as practical a way as possible. We do want not a situation to arise where a person runs to the High Court and says the commission is in dereliction of its duties, that it did not advise according to the sweeping obligations in section 13(2). If our wording is included it would give the commission the necessary protection when it is up and running.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.