Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 502: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will report on the consequences of the High Court ruling that the use of laser guns to monitor speeding offences does not comply with road traffic legislation; if previous convictions using this technology are rendered invalid; if, in cases in which persons accepted the option of paying a fine and losing two penalty points rather than proceeding to have the issue dealt with in court, these fines will now be waived; and if this option provided in the legislation, designed to discourage the waste of court time, will not result in unlawful findings of guilt being made by way of legal notice. [21070/05]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Garda authorities inform me that section 15 of the Road Traffic Act 2004, which was commenced on 20 January 2005, has remedied the situation following the decision of the High Court on prosecutions taken under section 21 of the Road Traffic Act 2002, by no longer requiring speed detection apparatus used by the Garda Síochána to produce a permanent record of speed to the suspect.

Where a person has been convicted in court, the court assessed all the evidence available to it before reaching a verdict. Decisions of a court can be appealed.

Where people opted to pay a fixed charge, they accepted that they had committed an offence. The High Court decision does not imply that an offence was not committed. Payment of a fixed charge is an option offered to drivers and acceptance of the offer is not a finding of guilt. A determination of guilt can only be made by a court.