The Gazette 1961 - 64

not be used in any circumstances for disclosure of anything that is privileged ? I would accept such an undertaking. DR. RYAN : I would ask the Deputy to observe that this can be administered only by the Revenue Commissioners and not by an inspector. MR. SWEETMAN : That is why I am prepared to accept an undertaking. DR. RYAN : The Revenue Commissioners would have to give an order to an inspector to prosecute a solicitor, if he claimed privilege. It is not likely they will do that. I do not know that I could give the Deputy the undertaking. MR. SWEETMAN : With that on the records of the House, there will be an almighty row if anybody ever attempts it. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Section 16 agreed to." (Ddil Debates, 9th July, 1963. Cols. 443-445.) INVITATION FROM THE STATE BAR OF WISCONSIN The following letter received from the Secretary of the Special Committee of " World Peace Through Law" is published for the information of any members who may be planning to visit the United States :— " June i, 1963 Members of the Bench and Bar Gentlemen : It is our pleasure to bring you greetings from the members of the State Bar of Wisconsin, the organized bar of the State of Wisconsin, encompassing in its membership all persons admitted to the practice of law in the State of Wisconsin. Our purpose in writing you is to extend a personal invitation to each of you who should be planning a visit to the United States to accept hospitality from the members of the bar of the State of Wisconsin while you are visiting our state. In accordance with the objectives of the " People To People Programme " initiated by former President Dwight D. Eisenhower and continued by President John F. Kennedy, it is our hope to establish close personal relationships between members of your bar

Again, I want to ensure in relation to anti-evasion sections that the evader is properly caught within the net. At the same time, I want to be quite clear that in cases where there is professional privilege, nothing is done that could defeat that privilege. It seems to me there is a possibility of Section 16 as framed at present being utilised by the Revenue Commissioners for the purpose of requiring solicitors to do something which would be a breach of the privilege they owe to their clients. I want to stress to the Minister that in relation to privilege it is not the privilege of the solicitor but of the client that is at stake. The solicitor is not in any way concerned except as the custodian of the rights of his client. On the basis of the section as it stands, a situation could arise where the Revenue Com missioners could utilise the provision to require a solicitor to deliver his client's accounts and could take copies of the client's accounts, not for the purpose of verifying the solicitor's returns, which would be a proper thing to do, but to take copies from the client's account for the purpose of there after raising an assessment on the client concerned. That obviously would be a gross breach of privilege and would cut across the whole theory and practice, which is essential in any democracy, that when a person consults his lawyer about a situation in which he finds himself, it will be com pletely and absolutely confidential, guarded as closely as the closest State secret. It seems to me this section would permit the Revenue Com missioners to seek for breach of that privilege and, through inspection of the accounts or papers of a solicitor, obtain information not for the purpose of checking the solicitor's own profit return for assessment but for the purpose of checking those of his client. Nobody could possibly stand over such a practice. I do not see how any Deputy could have fears in respect of solicitors in a case like this. This lays down that the Revenue Commissioners may demand information with regard to the person's accounts and so on. It is obvious that if a solicitor were asked to give information—it is most unlikely that he will be asked—he would very promptly refuse to give it. He could say he is privileged. On the other hand, there would, I think, be a danger in putting in the amendment because if a person feared he was going to be asked about a certain item in his accounts, he might send that document to his solicitor and ask him to have it looked into. There is an obvious danger there. MR. SWEETMAN : Can we have an administrative undertaking from the Minister that the section will DR. RYAN :