Judge blasts 'systemic failure’ which could see criminals avoid jail

Tom Tuite

A judge in one of Dublin's busiest courts has slated what he termed a "systemic failure" which could stall cases, leave victims without justice, and see criminals avoid jail.

Presiding over a major hearing list at Dublin District Court on Thursday, Judge John Hughes was scathing regarding a decision to strip his court of a "garda presenter."

The specialised role involves a single sergeant handling cases and being briefed to give evidence of crimes and details of prior convictions for investigating officers in uncontested matters.

It also spares the arresting officer from being pulled away from other duties to appear in court.

"That is going to result in complaints, it is going to result in unfairness to victims, it's going to result in people who should be in jail ending up not in jail because of this systemic failure, that is the reality," he said on Thursday.

The issue has affected Court 2 in the Criminal Courts of Justice, where Hughes spoke about its impact on the heavy schedule.

Potentially, it could lead to over 100 gardaí now having to attend court on a single day to outline facts.

"You have seen already today where I struck out several charges because the guards weren't present, for whatever reason, I don't know. I have adjourned another case back to a list where I know in my heart nobody is going to be aware of it."

In one scenario, involving a woman who has pleaded guilty to multiple charges in prosecutions brought by two gardaí, the court needed to hear facts. Judge Hughes said, "The court presenter isn't here in a position to tell me anything about the case."

"Under the new regime, which I understand, on the sentencing day, all those guards are going to have to come to court to give the facts."

He said that a court presenter for these matters was essential.

Referring to a sentencing day next week, he said the combined number of gardaí involved in all the prosecutions was over 100 officers, "who have been communicated with to come to court when one garda sergeant normally deals with these matters".

"And what is going to happen? I pose the question. On the sentencing day, when a guard could not turn up, and a defendant is in custody who says 'I want justice dealt with'; I don't believe I have jurisdiction to strike out the matter in those circumstances. Remand in continuing custody? Is that what I'm supposed to do, notwithstanding the fact I might actually end up giving a community service, a fine, or a suspended sentence?"

At that time, one officer arrived, but another prosecuting garda was absent. Judge Hughes said that if he proceeded with one matter, it could result in a partial sentence and potential unfairness.

Concluding, he said, "Every summons, every charge sheet is taken in the name of the Director of Public Prosecutions. I don't know if the DPP was consulted in relation to this new arrangement or not.

"It is not a matter for this court to concern itself in relation to internal communications between the guards and the DPP, but it is a matter as to how this court runs its list."