The Children's Court will rule next month on whether or not the case against a 17-year-old boy charged with the false imprisonment of former tánaiste Joan Burton and her adviser, two years ago, should be dismissed.
Judge John King has adjourned the case until 21 October.
Counsel for both the prosecution and the defence made legal submissions but the judge said he would not make a decision today.
He said he wants to read the case law, review all evidence, review submissions and then come back and give decision.
Earlier lawyers for the prosecution told The Children's Court that the teenager was an active participant in the false imprisonment.
The prosecution claims the boy, who was 15 at the time, was one of a number of people involved in detaining Ms Burton and Karen O'Connell without their consent in two garda vehicles for two to three hours, as they left a function in Jobstown in Tallaght in November 2014.
Prosecution counsel, Tony McGillicuddy, said the false imprisonment was more than momentary, and while there is a right to peaceful protest in the constitution it carries with it no exception from criminal law.
He was arguing against the defence's request for the Children's Court to dismiss the charges against the boy.
The boy has denied the charges.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
Mr McGillicuddy dismissed legal argument, presented by the defence, that the accused should have been warned about the risk of being charged with a criminal offence.
Referring to the footage shown to the court of protesters moving in front of a garda jeep, Mr McGillicuddy said there was clear evidence of what the accused's intent was.
He said his use of a megaphone, encouraging people to sit down, and he himself sitting down, showed he was intent on falsely imprisoning Ms Burton and Ms O'Connell.
He said to categorise that as peaceful and innocuous, is wrong.
Prosecution counsel said the argument that there was an agreement between gardaí and protestors, is just not made out in the evidence, which he said made apparent the toxic nature of the atmosphere that day.
He said the defence's arguments ignore that Ms Burton and Ms O'Connell had a right to progress, and they were marooned in two garda vehicles for three hours.
Defence counsel Giollaíosa Ó Lideadha said he was asking the judge to dismiss the charges, on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence against the boy and that the prosecution had not satisfied the court that the boy's right to a fair trial had been upheld.
In his submissions to the court, Mr Ó Lideadha said the legislation under which the boy had been charged must be interpreted in accordance with the Constitution and with the European Convention on Human Rights. He said it could not just be interpreted literally.
He said a very brief, momentary detention, was not false imprisonment. He said the prosecution evidence was that the boy was walking backwards filming Ms Burton while saying "talk to us Joan".
He said the prosecution was claiming he should be convicted of false imprisonment based on evidence that at one point the boy was not backing up, had some physical interaction with a garda and that Ms Burton's progress was delayed.
Mr Ó Lideadha said there was at least a reasonable possibility on the evidence that there had been an agreement between gardaí and protesters to allow Ms Burton and Ms O'Connell's vehicle to be "slow marched" out of Tallaght.
He also said the boy had never been told he could be charged with a public order offence, let alone the offence of false imprisonment. He said convicting him of false imprisonment, and even the decision to charge him with this offence in the first place was not in accordance with his rights under the Constitution.
Mr Ó Lideadha also told Judge King there was insufficient evidence to find his client guilty of the offences. He said the court had the power to dismiss the charges if it appeared from the evidence that there was a real risk of an unfair trial.
Mr Ó Lideadha also told the court that the prosecution had failed to prove the offences beyond reasonable doubt. He said that if the charges were not dismissed, then that would amount to a failure to vindicate the constitutional rights of the accused, a failure to uphold his right to a fair trial as well as a failure to uphold the authorities' obligation not to abuse their powers and not to act in a manner inconsistent with basic fairness.
He said, depending on the judge's decision in relation to the interpretation of the legislation, the defence may ask him to state a case to the High Court on the issue.
