The Gazette 1967/71

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. Whitcombe—C. A. Widgery, Fenton, Atkinson and O'Connor L.JJ. (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