The Gazette 1967/71

359 / 736

with systematic breaches of human rights. The
case was duly examined by the Commission of
Human Rights in Strasbourg who with the support
of 8 international lawyers eventually issued a
1,200 page report containing the following indict
ments :—
(1) The Greek Government claimed that the
suspension of civil liberties was justified
by the existence of a danger to the State.
The Commission finds that there is no
satisfactory evidence to prove that left
wing groups were planning revolution
before or after the junta came into power
in April 1967, and that the evidence by the
Greek Government was forged. The acti
vities of Communists was not such as to
be a public emergency threatening the life
of the nation.
(2) No satisfactory evidence was produced
that, as alleged by the Greek Government,
there were caches of arms, nor of the use
or attempted use of firearms or explosives
in street demonstrations or elsewhere.
(3) The allegation by the Greek Government
that there was a "Common front" between
Communists and democratic left-wing
supporters is rejected.
(4) As a result of a detailed examination of 58
witnesses contained in 400 pages, the Com
mission has found it established beyond
doubt that torture or ill-treatment has not
merely been exercised in a number of cases,
but has become a common matter of
administrative practice in Greece; the
Greek authorities have failed to investigate
complaints, or to ensure remedies for such
complainst.
As a result of this Report, the Greek Govern
ment decided to leave the Council of Europe
instead of being expelled from that organisation.
IRISH ASSOCIATION OF JURISTS
Dr- Harry Calvert, Reader in Law at Queen's
University, Belfast, delivered a lecture to the Irish
Association of Jurists on 18th November 1969
in the Clarence Hotel, Dublin, on " The Consti
tution of Northern Ireland ". The full text of the
lecture is available in the Library.
SCHOLARSHIPS
The Overrend Scholarship has been awarded to
Mr. Justin Thomas Sadlier, B.C.L. (N.U.I.), of 15
Beechmount Drive, Clonskea, Dublin 14.
The Findlater Scholarship has been awarded to
Mr. Patrick Joseph McCarthy, B.A. (N.U.I.), of
Garralacka House, Clonakilty, Co. Cork,
THE MONTHLY DIGEST
In reading English cases reported hereunder members
should have regard to differences in the statute law
in Ireland.
Road Traffic Acts—Recent Breathalyser Cases :—
1—A driver is involved in road accident. Asked by a
policeman to provide a breath test, he did so, and it was
positive. The policeman used teh following formula:—
" I shall have to ask you to the police station for further
tests ", the motorist accompanied the policeman to the
police station and underwent a second breath test there,
which was also positive. The motorist was then requested
to provide a blood sample, and did so; after laboratory
testing, this also proved positive. He was then allowed
out on bail. It was contended before the justices that the
motorist had never been " arrested" and that conse
quently the Court could not act on the subsequent
evidence as to the breath test and as to the blood test.
The justices, having found that at no time was it made clear
to the motorist that he was under compulsion, dismissed
the case. The appeal by the police was also dismissed on
the ground that an arrest is only constituted where any
form of words is used which, in the circumstances of the
case, were calculated to bring, and did bring, to the
accused's notice that he was under compulsion to which
he submitted. If a person has taken drink or drugs, it is
particularly desirable that clear words should be used.—
Alderson v. Boothe—Q.B. Divisional Court Lord Parker,
Blain and Donaldson J. J.)—(1969) 2 A.E.R. 271.
2—It is essential that before a person can be asked
to supply a sample of blood or urine, he should be
given an opportunity to provide a sample of breath on an
apparatus fully specified by the Minister in conformity
with the Statute.
The motorist had been drinking at a party until i a.m.
and was followed home by the police. He turned into a
side road, and he and his passengers were out of the
car before the police arrived. The motorist said he was
not driving, but admitted he had had too much to drink.
He voluntarily agreed to accompany the police to the
police station, but, on the ground that he was not the
driver, refused to take a breath test. He was arrested,
and asked two hours later to submit to another breath
test; this time, he agreed to it, and it proved positive.
He was then requested to provide a specimen of blood
or urine, but refused to do so, and was charged in con
nection with this; he was convicted, fined £20, and dis
qualified from driving for 12 months. On appeal, it was
held, on the basis of the first sentence above, that the
conviction should be quashed.—R. v. Wh be—C. A.
Widgery, Fenton, Atkinson and O'Connor . (1969) i.
A.E.R. 157.
3—Motorist parked his car outside relative's house, He
took the ignition key, got out and locked the car. At this
stage, he was stopped by police officers who had followed
him. As his breath smelt of alcohol, he was cautioned
and told he was drunk. The motorist was unable to blow
up the bag of the breathalyser when requested to do so,
but voluntarily accompanied the police to a police station
200 yards away where he had two breath tests, which
were positive. However he had not been formally arrested.
On being charged, the information was dismissed. The
appeal was also dismissed on the grounds (i) that the
words " driving or attempting to drive " in that Statute
did not include a person who was no longer driving or
76