The Minister for Justice yesterday defended the stance he took during the Dail debate last week on the controversy surrounding the release of five men questioned about the seizure of cannabis worth £3 million. The judge in the case, who granted an order extending the detention of the suspects, was not a nominated judge as required under the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act.

Mr O'Donoghue outlined in detail what happened during the arrest and subsequent release of the five suspects. He told deputies he was unable to give the information last week in the House because gardai dealing with the case were still involved in "the vitally important task of attempting to rectify the difficulties which arose".

In a 30-minute statement to the Dail, he stressed that "the procedures adopted in this case have on many previous occasions been successfully applied in court" and no difficulties were encountered.

He also said the judge involved in the initial hearing to extend the detention order for the five suspects, incorrectly thought he had been nominated to deal with such cases.

Mr O'Donoghue stressed, however, that should it be found that the 1996 Drug Trafficking Act was not operating "in the manner in which this House would wish" then it would be addressed "as a matter of urgency".

Much of last week's questioning and criticism related to whether the State was represented at the hearing to extend the detention of the five suspects for a further 72 hours. Mr O'Donoghue said it was not normal practice for the gardai to have legal representation for such an application and he pointed out that the application was actually granted.

Details of the case would be fully reviewed and changes in practice would be made if there was a need to do so. The Minister said he would be discussing with the President of the District Court "what procedures his office might be in a position to put in place to ensure that those who need to know who is nominated for the purposes of the Act are so made aware".

He said the secretary-general of the Department had been in touch with the President of the District Court who "has certain concerns about the matter of nominations which will require further discussion with him".

The Minister acknowledged there had been so much criminal law reform that it was difficult for people operating the law to keep fully abreast of all developments. He said that "once legislation is enacted it is a matter for the courts to interpret it and for that reason there has been a reluctance on the part of my Department to take any action in relation to explaining the effects of that legislation".

Department officials would, nonetheless, examine what might usefully be done to deal with the situation. "This will involve consultations with the judiciary, branches of the legal professions and the Garda Commissioner," he said.

Mr O'Donoghue said he had a duty to explain the matter and what happened, "but apportionment of blame is not something which I am prepared to engage upon".

He told deputies the five suspects had originally been arrested and detained for 48 hours. Gardai then went to the court on Saturday, November 15th, seeking an extension of the detention. Judge Windle granted the order and, according to the Minister, the gardai believed the judge had been nominated by the President of the District Court to deal with such an application, "a belief shared by the judge".

Since the Act came into force, 255 people have been detained under the Act and an extension granted in 33 cases, he said.

Mr O'Donoghue said Chief Supt Carty, "because of developments in another unrelated case", became aware that there was some doubt as to whether Judge Windle had been nominated for the purposes of the Act to extend detention orders.

Supt Carty contacted Judge Windle at home on Monday, November 17th, "but was assured by the judge that there was no cause for concern". Supt Carty then contacted the DPP to clarify the situation and a member of the DDP's office contacted the office of the President of the District Court and was informed that Judge Windle had not been nominated.

The DPP then directed the release of all five suspects. They were immediately re-arrested and charged under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Solicitors for the accused submitted at a sitting before Judge William Early that the prosecution was precluded from re-arresting the suspects.

He ruled the re-arrests were unlawful, the charges and their appearance in court were also unlawful. He said the accused could only be re-arrested if gardai had new information since the suspects' release.

Gardai decided to re-arrest and charge the five suspects. Two were arrested, "the other three could not be located". Gardai went to Judge Early's home that evening but the judge declined to accept the warrants because they were "not appropriate", given his ruling earlier that day.

The following morning a solicitor from the Chief State Solicitor's Office appeared before Judge King under instruction to apply for arrest warrants. She issued the warrants.

The two arrested suspects, along with a third, appeared before Judge Early and in case of two they were remanded in custody, but the judge then "vacated his orders" and they were released as was the third suspect, Mr O'Donoghue told deputies.

The case is being appealed to the High Court.