The Court of Appeal has dismissed Robert Mills’s appeal against two drug convictions, ruling that evidence from undercover Garda test purchases was admissible in the circumstances of his case. The court found no breach of his constitutional right to trial in due course of law or his right to a fair trial under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Mills had initially pleaded not guilty to six counts. After a two-day hearing on whether the Garda evidence should be excluded, the trial judge ruled it admissible. Mills then pleaded guilty to two counts of possessing controlled drugs for sale or supply. He received two-year sentences on each count, suspended for two years subject to conditions, and appealed against conviction.
The operation took place in the Drimnagh area of Dublin in March 2013. Two undercover Gardaí asked people they encountered on the street whether drugs were available. A 16-year-old made a call, and Mills arrived and sold the officers a €25 cannabis deal. One officer called Mills the following day and arranged another €25 purchase. Evidence at the hearing also described a further transaction three days later, for which the officer paid €50.
The Garda supervisor said the operation, known as Operation Trident, had been sanctioned at Commissioner level and that participating officers were trained and briefed to avoid enticement. He also said there was no official Garda code of practice for test purchase deployments. The trial judge concluded the officers had offered an unexceptional opportunity to commit an offence and had investigated in an essentially passive manner.
The Court of Appeal said undercover drug operations can serve a legitimate public interest, but stressed the importance of proper authorisation, control, supervision and records. It described the apparent absence in Ireland of a formal system and dedicated code for authorising and recording such operations as unsatisfactory, and said a code of practice should be established.
On the evidence in this case, however, the court found the operation had a clear purpose, the officers were adequately trained and the initial approach was a general inquiry about drug availability. Mills was not pressured or induced to offend, the court concluded. It held the trial judge was correct to admit the evidence and dismissed the appeal. The ruling addressed the circumstances of this appeal; it did not establish that every drug test purchase operation is lawful.