Michael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am just making that point. The timing of this legislation was such as to preclude me from putting down amendments because I was getting jabbed and other things last week. I am happy that we are taking it at a pace which will allow us to look carefully at each section, rather than rushing the whole thing through.

Senator Ó Donnghaile said that, in Northern Ireland, expanding the matters that can be dealt with at a preliminary trial has not been the happiest in effect. We should be careful because the whole idea is, in one sense, to keep the range of things that can be dealt with at a preliminary hearing reasonably under control so that mini-trials are not happening before a jury ever comes near the matter. However, I favour Senator Ward's amendment. Something like "inter alia" could be put in. I do not think one needs both amendments Nos. 3 and 4. It would be belt and braces to insert both. However, the matters a trial court should asses should not be absolutely limited to those listed at sections 7(a) to (d), inclusive.It should be slightly more flexible than that. One does not want either the accused or the State saying the judge's order was made without statutory power or outside the judge's statutory power in every case. If we included wording like "inter alia" or "including the following", the Judiciary would probably interpret paragraphs (a) to (d) as indicating the likely scope of issues but would be given a little flexibility. If the matters in paragraphs (a) to (d) were the only grounds, some unintended consequence could follow such that a judge might say that while he or she would love to make the order, he or she could not. The proposal makes common sense. Everyone might want the order to be made in the trial, including the prosecution and accused, but it might not be possible, for whatever reason. Therefore, I favour this amendment.