Paul Murphy criticises Special Criminal Court, warns of injustices
Paul Murphy criticised the Special Criminal Court and warned it creates a risk of miscarriages of justice through non-jury trials, secret evidence and broad prosecutorial power. He cited the Salins case and a 2021 example where a man spent 14 months in prison for IRA membership before the court found a miscarriage of justice.
Main critique of Special Criminal Court
Murphy argued that non-jury trials allow convictions on the basis of a senior Garda's word, inferences and secret documents not disclosed to the public, and give the DPP massive power to try people without a jury - a situation he said opens the potential for miscarriages of justice.
Examples and scale of miscarriages
He noted the Salins case and a 2021 case where someone spent 14 months in prison for IRA membership before the Special Criminal Court ruled it a miscarriage of justice, and warned that known cases are likely only the tip of the iceberg because the majority of miscarriages are never identified.
Rights groups and suggested alternatives
Murphy quoted the Irish Council for Civil Liberties saying the Special Criminal Court presents an insuperable obstacle to the right to a fair trial and noted similar concerns from the UN Human Rights Committee, Amnesty International and Mary Robinson. He argued that jury or witness intimidation can be addressed through other means and said a remote jury with video access is preferable to having no jury at all.
Political consequences and criticism of parties
He expressed disappointment that the Green Party and Sinn Féin have dropped their previous opposition to the legislation, saying Sinn Féin's effort to show it can be a safe pair of hands may undermine its appeal for radical change. He said about a third of Sinn Féin members voted against at the Ardèche and hoped the position would be overturned at the next Ardèche.
Demand for evidence of jury intimidation
Murphy said the state has never produced proof that jury intimidation is a significant problem and that the evidence needed to justify removing such a basic civil liberty has not been presented.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
All right, just before Deputy O'Callaghan goes, he stated that the only miscarriage of justice he's aware of in the Special Criminals Court is the Salins case, but a very quick Google on my phone presents a case from 2021 where a man spent 14 months in prison for IRA membership and the Special Criminal Court subsequently found that to be a miscarriage of justice. Surely the point is that the majority of miscarriages of justice are never identified. We only know it's the tip of the iceberg that you see. And if you have a situation where you have no jury, when people can be convicted on the basis of the word of a senior Garda, when people can be convicted on the basis of inferences and secret information contained in documents that are not disclosed to the public, that where you give massive power to the DPP to try people without a jury, well then you're opening up a situation with the potential for miscarriages of justice. I also have to say I don't agree with the idea that a jury absolutely has to be in the same room as a judge. I don't really see the logic of that. I think it's better to have a jury that is remote, with video access and so on, they can see without being identified, than to have all the problems in terms of no jury at all. To quote from the Irish Council for Civil Liberties in November, Special Criminal Court presents an insuperable obstacle to the right to a fair trial. The continued existence of a special non-jury court in Ireland is an intolerable interference with constitutional fair trial rights. It cannot be justified on practical or legal grounds. As other legal systems have shown, any problems with jury or witness intimidation can be addressed through other means. We know the UN Human Rights Committee, Amnesty International, Mary Robinson have all made very similar points. These extraordinary powers allow people to be locked up without a right to a trial by jury, and without actual evidence presented against them, just on the opinion of Garda. I think that it's very disappointing that the Green Party, having gone into government, has now dropped their previous opposition to this legislation on civil liberties grounds. Similarly, Sinn Féin, in preparation to going into government, in trying to indicate to the establishment that they will be a safe pair of hands, have also dropped their long-standing correct opposition to the Special Criminal Court. I understand maybe a third of Sinn Féin members voted against at the Ardèche. I hope that the position is overturned at the next Ardèche. I think, unfortunately, it will give people who look to Sinn Féin for radical change a question, about whether in government will Sinn Féin actually deliver on the radical change that people are looking for, when they are so committed to demonstrating that they can be a safe pair of hands for the establishment, even at the expense of completely undermining very basic civil liberties. I also want to make the point briefly that we are never given any proof of this question of jury intimidation being a significant problem in our criminal justice system. I mentioned earlier, there are plenty of alternatives if this is a significant problem, but the evidence has never even been presented to justify taking away such a basic civil liberty.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
