They stressed to members that they should concentrate on identifying what they wanted from Ireland’s drug laws — and focus on the outcome rather than the process of achieving it.

They said to leave the details to the Government and the Oireachtas to identify how to implement their recommendations.

And, this is what happened at the final meeting of the assembly.

Across the board, the members agreed to a “comprehensive health-led” approach for possession of drugs for personal use. It was Option C of five options available.

They applied these options across four categories: cannabis, hallucinogens, cocaine, and all other drugs. An "explanatory narrative" was provided to members on each option.

Under Option C, possession of drugs would “remain illegal” but people would be given “extensive” opportunities to engage voluntarily with health-led services.

“This would minimise, or potentially completely remove, the possibility of criminal conviction and prison sentences for simple possession,” it said.

“This mirrors the practice in both Austria and Portugal, which both combine health diversion, decriminalisation, and dissuasive sanctions.” 

The narrative said new legislation may be required and this would require “detailed scrutiny”.

Given the legal and constitutional issues to be considered, the Citizens’ Assembly views is as the responsibility of the Oireachtas, informed by legal advice and detailed pre-legislative scrutiny, to determine the most appropriate legal mechanism to achieve this goal.

Whether the Government or the Oireachtas anticipated this development or not, the ball has been firmly put back in their courts.

In addition, the assembly posed questions for the Oireachtas to consider:

• Does the Irish legal system allow for criminal offences for possession to be reclassified as ‘administrative’ offences? It said the answer to this has an important bearing on whether “decriminalization can be done on a de-jure [stated in law] or de-facto [implemented in practice] basis”;
• What limits, if any, should there be for the number of times a person caught in possession of drugs can be diverted to health interventions before being referred back to the courts for sanction, such as a fine?
• What dissuasive sanctions, if any, should be available for repeat offenders, and should the courts or some other body apply them?

Assembly secretary Cathal O’Regan explained to members that the assembly simply wasn’t able to deal with these complex legal questions: “It isn’t within our grasp as an assembly to figure out the legalities about what’s possible or not.” 

Whether or not civil servants, the attorney general, and officials expert in drafting legislation can do so is yet to be seen. They will take their direction from the Government and whether or not the political will is there.

The Department of Justice or Health would most likely seek submissions from key agencies, such as the DPP and the Gardaí, and others. That is likely to throw up a few legal banana skins.

At some stage, the heads of a bill, or a preliminary draft, would go to an Oireachtas committee, and they will hold hearings.

That would most likely involve a wide range of legal experts, including possibly some of those who spoke at the assembly, as well as Mr Reid and Mr O’Regan, as well as representatives of various state agencies, such as the Gardaí, DPP, etc.

It is worth recalling that a previous Government expert body — packed with department officials, gardaí, the DPP and legal experts — previously examined this issue.

The Working Group to Consider Alternative Approaches to the Possession of Drugs for Personal Use, published in 2019, came down against decriminalisation, concluding that, under the Irish legal system, it “may lead to de facto legalisation”.

It also said Ireland’s legal system was not like Portugal and that ‘administrative’ fines were not legally possible here.

This committee did come up with the Health Diversion Programme, where someone caught in possession of drugs for personal use on a first, and possibly two, occasions, would be referred to a health intervention rather than be prosecuted.

The Government agreed to this programme, which, as the assembly heard and commented on, has still not been implemented four years on.

In relation to cannabis, the assembly was a vote or two away from recommending legalisation.

The final split was “extremely tight” as the election and IT specialist Ciaran Manning described the result — 39 in favour of a comprehensive health-led approach and 38 in favour of legalisation.

If legalisation did get the most votes it would have repercussions not just in relation to possession, but also involving legalisation for the production and sale of cannabis.

Under a comprehensive health-led approach, the supply and sale of drugs continues to be in the hands of organised crime.

The vote on legal options was counted under the single transferrable vote system — the standard election system used in Ireland.

This meant that although more people voted for the legalisation of cannabis (36) than the second most popular, comprehensive health-led approach (23), on the first count, by the time the preferences of people who gave their first choice one of the other options were eliminated and their subsequent preferences distributed, more voted for the comprehensive health led approach (39) in the fourth and final count than legalisation (38).

A number of members subsequently expressed concern, both on Saturday and again yesterday, that this voting system was not clear to some members, but chair Paul Reid said he was happy that it was, and this view was backed up by Mr O’Regan.

Mr Manning said the election process was also spelled out on the ballot paper.

Mr Reid did agree to one member that the close cannabis vote reflected a general view that it should be treated differently than other drugs, and said this would be reflected in their report, which will be sent to the Oireachtas and the Government in December.

In a pre-recorded video message to the assembly, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar said the Government would "carefully consider and respond comprehensively" to their recommendations.

Given their massive and complex task, and the limited time available to them, the assembly has done its bit for society. It is now in the hands of the politicians.