Penalty for Jaywalking

MadsL

I note that Gardai are to "interview" and possibly prosecute jaywalkers.

http://www.thejournal.ie/poll-jaywalk-618793-Oct2012/

I was told many years ago that Gardai had no powers in this regard;
S.I. No. 182/1997 — Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997 seems to have no penalty for breaching the pedestrian regulations. On what legal basis would the Gardai be able to conduct such "interviews" and what would the outcome be other than "Howya Gard, yeah sorry, right see ya!"

ResearchWill

MadsL wrote: »

I note that Gardai are to "interview" and possibly prosecute jaywalkers.

http://www.thejournal.ie/poll-jaywalk-618793-Oct2012/

I was told many years ago that Gardai had no powers in this regard;
S.I. No. 182/1997 — Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997 seems to have no penalty for breaching the pedestrian regulations. On what legal basis would the Gardai be able to conduct such "interviews" and what would the outcome be other than "Howya Gard, yeah sorry, right see ya!"

Section 88 of the 1961 Act allows the creation of regulations in relation to "Bye-laws for the general control of traffic and pedestrians." It says at subsection 5 "
(5) A person who contravenes a bye-law under this section shall be guilty of an offence."

Then section 102 says "102.—Where a person is guilty of an offence under any section or subsection of a section of this Act and, apart from this section and disregarding any disqualification that may be capable of being imposed, no penalty is provided for the offence, such person shall be liable on summary conviction—

(a) in the case of a first offence under that section or subsection—to a fine not exceeding twenty pounds,

(b) in the case of a second offence under that section or subsection, or of a third or subsequent such offence other than an offence referred to in the next paragraph—to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds, and

(c) in the case of a third or subsequent offence under that section or subsection which is the third or subsequent such offence in any period of twelve consecutive months—to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment."

Those penalties have been amended.

The 2006 Act increased penalties, the fines Act 2010 may also have amended them.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2006/en/act/pub/0023/sec0018.html

Procrastastudy

I found:

On summary conviction, first offence—a fine not exceeding €800. Second offence under same section/subsection—a fine not exceeding €1,500. Third or subsequent offence under same section/subsection within 12 consecutive months—fine not exceeding €1,500 or imprisonment not exceeding 3 months, or both. (s.102 , Road Traffic Act, 1961 ). In Offences and Penalties—Statutes: CONSOLIDATED ROAD TRAFFIC LEGISLATION (RELEASE 10, UP-TO-DATE TO FEBRUARY 8, 2012)

Dunno if thats any use.

Victor

The penalties would be specified in the relevant act.

Procrastastudy

Victor wrote: »

The penalties would be specified in the relevant act.

I actually don't think they are in this instance.

ResearchWill

Procrastastudy wrote: »

I actually don't think they are in this instance.

Yes they are, the relevent Act is the 1961 Act, it sets out that breach of a regulation or bye law under that act is an offence. Then section 102 of the relevant act sets out the penalty if no penalty is provided.

MadsL

But do the Gardai have the power to detain under this Act, I remember being told that there was no power for them to request name and address under this Act and hence why jaywalking was unenforceable. Could equally be an utter myth.