AUTHORISED INVESTIGATORS (Hansard, 6 March 1991)

§ Mr. Mallon
I beg to move amendment No. 13, in page 47, line 36, leave out from beginning to 'require' and insert 'A circuit judge may, on an application made by an authorised investigator,'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this it will be convenient to consider amendment No. 14, in line 41, leave out from beginning to 'require' and insert 'A circuit judge may, on an application made by an authorised investigator'.

§ Mr. Mallon
In Committee, I opposed giving to a lay person powers that are normally reserved for a police officer. The amendments are designed to introduce a judicial requirement into an order for a person to attend and answer questions, or an order to produce documents. The legitimate power of a police officer should not be given to a lay person, however qualified. A lay person should not be able to initiate and continue a specialised investigation. That is why the amendment provides that the powers should be given to a judge and not an authorised lay person.

§ Mr. Trimble
I am puzzled by the drafting of the amendment, which refers to a circuit judge. Are there circuit judges in Northern Ireland? Is the hon. Gentleman not confusing Northern Ireland with the Republic, where there are circuit judges?

§ Mr. Mallon
The hon. Gentleman's intervention shows his youth. When I was about the hon. Gentleman's age, county court judges were known as circuit court judges. I happen to live close to the border and I have some knowledge of judges south of the border, who are also known as circuit court judges.

§ Dr. Mawhinney
The amendment would confer on circuit court judges a novel inquisitorial role. As drafted, it would authorise them to require persons to attend before them. Such a person would be required to answer questions put by the judge. I suspect that the hon. Member for Newry and Armagh (Mr. Mallon) may not have intended to introduce such a far-reaching reform, and that his intention was to require an authorised investigator to obtain authority from a ciruit court judge before exercising the powers that are set out in paragraph 2(1) of schedule 4. If that was the hon. Gentleman's intention, I must tell him that it has not been achieved by the amendment. I therefore hope that he will be willing to withdraw it.
I must tell the hon. Gentleman also that amendment No. 14 is defective for the same reason. I hope that he will feel able not to move it.

§ Mr. Mallon
I do not accept that the amendment is defective. If someone is required to attend, to produce documents and to answer questions, his attendance should be the result of a judicial decision and not that of a lay person. Given the time of night, however, and an ever-bludgeoning thirst, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.