Airman seeks to halt discharge over drugs test

An airman with the Defence Forces has taken a High Court action to stop his proposed discharge arising from his testing positive…

An airman with the Defence Forces has taken a High Court action to stop his proposed discharge arising from his testing positive for cannabis in a random drug test at Casement Aerodrome.

Airman David Rawson (21) denies he was smoking cannabis and claims his testing positive may be a result of his earlier being in his car with two friends who were smoking cannabis.

He claims that, prior to his discharge being recommended, he was given no opportunity to call evidence in relation to the possibility of a false positive test from passive smoking.

Airman Rawson, of Carrow Road, Drimnagh, Dublin, has brought judicial review proceedings against the Minister for Defence aimed at preventing his discharge after testing positive for cannabis following a random compulsory drugs test at Casement Aerodrome on November 27th, 2006.

READ MORE

The court has restrained the proposed discharge coming into effect pending the outcome of the case which was opened yesterday by Michael Howard, counsel for Airman Rawson, before Mr Justice John Hedigan.

The judge heard Airman Rawson was advised on December 11th, 2006, that he had tested positive.

He has complained he was given no opportunity to having the sample tested by an independent laboratory of his own choice but was given the opportunity of having another sample tested at one of three laboratories.

He took up that option but that sample also subsequently tested positive.

He said he had told the military authorities he had been in the company of two friends the previous Saturday, that all three of them were in his car and that his two friends had smoked cannabis.

Airman Rawson said he was astonished at being told he had tested positive for a substance. As air force recruits, they had always been advised of the consequences of taking any prohibited substance and were also advised there was no possibility of passive smoking in any way amounting to or giving rise to a positive test under the regulations, he said.

"I wish to state categorically that I did not, nor have I ever, consumed any illegal drugs or substances," he said.

As an active young man who keeps physically fit, he had no interest in the consumption of drugs, he said.

He had never been in trouble in his life.

"To be discharged obviously not only ends my military career but will affect me in the most damning and incompensatory way for the rest of my life," he said.

Airman Rawson said he would have passively inhaled some illegal substance but denied he had "ingested" such a substance within the meaning of the regulations.

Despite representations by him, he was told on January 29th that the General Officer Commanding was recommending his discharge.

Opposing the application, the Minister for Defence contends Airman Rawson, after joining the Defence Forces in September 2006, underwent a drugs awareness programme.

The Minister denies the Defence Forces failed properly to apply the relevant provisions laid down for compulsory random drug testing.

The test was carried out pursuant to the regulations and the applicant was selected at random, it is pleaded.

A second sample also tested positive and Airman Rawson had exercised his right to make representations by way of appeal.

However, his commanding officer was satisfied that a reasonable doubt did not exist and recommended his discharge, the Minister said.

The hearing continues today.