THERE are reasons to doubt if the likelihood of a person committing a crime if given bail can be accurately predicted, Mr Adrian Hardiman SC, told the conference.
Mr Hardiman was examining the Government's plan to hold a referendum at the end of November, when the public will be asked to allow the bail laws to be changed to allow a person to be refused bail if it is believed that they will commit a new offence.
"There is reason to doubt whether Garda predictions in such circumstances will be, or can be, particularly accurate," he said.
"When bail is opposed under the present regime, it is frequently on the basis of a garda opinion that the defendant will not attend for trial. Yet where bail is granted, the defendant does actually attend in a large majority of cases."
He said a British study found that about 75 per cent of people granted bail against police objections completed their remand period without a new offence being recorded.
Mr Hardiman said it was inevitable that a significant part of the case against granting bail would consist of Garda opinion. This raised another issue. There would inevitably be "allegations that inculpatory statements have been made in consideration of a prise not to oppose bail".
"Even at present, as emerged from the report of the Kerry Babies tribunal, this is a significant feature in certain defendants' conduct under interrogation".
He said a compensation scheme for those held in custody and then found not guilty would also be needed. "It is of course true to say that our bail provisions are far more liberal than those of our European partners and especially those adhering to the civil law system. It is less frequently pointed out that many of these countries provide for compensation in the event that the accused is ultimately acquitted, a topic which is not featured in our current discussions."
He instanced the case of a man who faced a serious charge in Northern Ireland and was on remand in custody for almost three years before being acquitted.
"It is difficult to distinguish between that situation and a form of internment.
"I have had personal experience of a client acquitted after a period of eight or nine months in custody who emerged vindicated but penniless as a result of the destruction of his one man business and who almost immediately emigrated."
He also criticised some sections of the media for the way they comment and report on crime.
"Perceptions of the workings of the criminal justice system have been heavily influenced, especially in recent times, by media reportage and comment," he said. "Much of this has been sensationalist, ill informed and prejudiced. It has been contrived, and sometimes deliberately so, to give the impression of a system of ludicrous technicality which has prevented the conviction or even the trial of persons widely known to be guilty of serious offences because (to quote one newspaper advertisement) `the system works to the benefit of the criminal'."
He said such coverage had coloured the public view of the system. "It is belied by the actual conviction rates in criminal cases.
He said some articles also quoted "Garda sources" and carried comments which could be gravely prejudicial to innocent people.