The chief justice has warned there is no "minor form" of drug- dealing as far as the courts are concerned, and that all suppliers are at risk of serious sentences irrespective of the type of drug or its value.
"Any form of drug-dealing is a serious offence, and there is no form of drug dealing that is not a serious offence," said Chief Justice John Murray. When jailing drug dealers the courts were entitled to take into account the impact of the particular offence on the local community and on society.
He said the courts were familiar with drug offenders who began with cannabis and then moved on to using ecstasy and cocaine. This undermined arguments that supplying cannabis was not to be considered too seriously by the courts.
Even low-value drug hauls could warrant a serious sentence if the circumstances justified it. The "dominant factor" was having drugs for the purpose of supplying or selling to others.
He made the remarks when giving the Court of Criminal Appeal's (CCA) judgment rejecting a bid by a Sligo man to have reduced a four-year sentence imposed on him after he pleaded guilty to having ecstasy and cannabis for supply.
Stephen Dunbar (31), of Garavogue Villas, Sligo, was jailed by Judge Miriam Reynolds at Sligo Circuit Criminal Court in December 2005 for a total of four years after he pleaded guilty to having, on June 24th, 2005, 90 ecstasy tablets and nine ounces of cannabis for supply.
The chief justice said Dunbar came from "a decent family" and his mother was hard-working.
There were difficult and tragic circumstances in his family background and a suggestion he had psychiatric problems. He was himself a drug user, and gardaí had not really disagreed that he was being exploited.
Dunbar had become involved with drugs at the age of 15, beginning with cannabis, then ecstasy and later cocaine, the chief justice said.
This pattern was "a familiar story" to the CCA, undermining arguments sometimes made that the supply of cannabis was in some way not to be considered as seriously as the courts have in fact considered it.
The trial judge had properly taken into account the seriousness of the offence, and had pointed out that drug-use and the crimes surrounding it were a very serious problem.
The trial judge had also stated that the lives of young people were being blighted by drugs and the fabric of society torn apart. There were huge amounts of money to be made in the drugs trade, although not by Dunbar.
She said many young people died as a result of ecstasy, and it was also clear that some people involved in drug-dealing were also involved in murder.
The drug problem had to be taken seriously. It was not a matter of "degrees of seriousness". The business would not thrive without persons like Dunbar, a petty criminal, who was prepared to move drugs.
These remarks, the chief justice said, were "a correct and proper statement" about the drug problem here.
The CCA did not consider the sentence imposed on Dunbar disproportionate or that it reflected any error in principle.
