Ex-judge knocks new drug laws (Ireland)

[Lunar Loops]

Forget Gaybo's well intentioned and reasoned words, forget the steady trickle of reasoned articles in the press with regard to the Irish 'war on drugs', this IS the stark reality of the Ireland that we live in.

All reasoned argument is useless when you have people in power who are prepared to railroad in new policies to suit their own warped ends. No recourse to reasoned debate, just rushed policy. THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY.

All hail Fuhrer Mc Tool, all praise benevolent Bertie, for he can do no wrong..........


This from The Irish Independent:

Ex-judge knocks new drug laws

Forcing the judiciary to follow sentencing rules is 'assault on its independence'



FORMER High Court judge Feargus Flood has rounded on the Government over plans to force judges to impose 10-year mandatory minimum sentences for certain drug offences.
Justice Flood, who formerly chaired the planning tribunal inquiring into corrupt payments to politicians, said the new sentencing laws were an attack on the "fairness and individuality" of judges.
The judge, now retired, joins a chorus of disapproval for the Government's Criminal Justice Bill 2007, one of the most contested anti-crime packages to be introduced in recent years.
The bill, which will be debated for just five hours in the Dail, will be formally published today. If passed, it will make far-reaching changes to Ireland's bail laws, detention rules and sentencing norms.
It will further encroach on the constitutionally enshrined right to silence - a move that has alarmed judges, barristers, solicitors and civil-rights groups. It will also introduce electronic tagging for suspects released on bail.
Under section 30 of the bill, Justice Minister Michael McDowell will eliminate the "exceptional" circumstances in which judges have discretion to give less than the minimum 10 years' mandatory sentence for people in possession of €500,000 or more worth of drugs.
But Mr Flood, who said sentences could be appealed to the Court of Appeal and ultimately the Supreme Court, said judges were entitled to be independent in the exercise of their judicial function.
"Sentencing a person for a criminal offence is a part and parcel of their independent judicial function," he said on Newstalk 106's 'Lunchtime with Eamon Keane'.
"Mandatory sentencing, per se, is an infringement of their judicial function which not only requires observing the law, but being fair and just to the individual concerned.
"I can see the necessity for statutory minimum sentencing in relation to serious drug trafficking. I agree with the principle, but I also require judges to carry out their functions in a realistic and judicial way."
Opponents of the bill, which contains 51 new provisions and is being rushed through the Dail less than a year after the Criminal Justice Act 2006, say the new laws must be shelved until after the general election to allow for informed public debate.
The legal profession and opposition parties have criticised the amount of time being made available for debate and say many of the provisions are ill-thought out and destined to fail.
"The experience of rushed legislation in the criminal sphere is disastrous," said James MacGuill, a solicitor and senior vice-president of the Law Society, the governing body for solicitors.