The Gazette 1976

GAZETTE

b e t w e en the Irish a nd British G o v e r n m e n ts of D e c e m- ber, 1973, set out in Boland v. An Taoiseach, (1974) I.R. 343, is also relevant. Bv that clause it w a s a g r e ed that persons c o mm i t t i ng c r i mes of v i o l e n c e, h o w e v er mo t i v a t e d, w o u ld be b r o u g ht to trial, u resjM'ctn e ot the part of Ireland m w h i ch tliev w e re located. As a result ol tins clause, a L aw E n f o r c e m e nt C o mm i s s i on c o n- sisting of 4 British a nd 4 Irish r e p r e s e n t a t i v es w as e s t a b l i s h ed w h i ch e v e n t u a l lv issued a Rejxirt. Wh i le the British f a v o u r ed e x t r a d i t i on as the principle to he a p p l i e d, the Irish s u g g e s t i on of t he principle of e x t r a- territorialitv e mb o d i ed in tins Bill, w as u l t i ma t e ly a g r e e d. IV Section II Conflicts with Article 40(3) of the Constitution T h e provisions of S.l 1 of the C r i m i n al Justice Bill are:- ( 1) It is c o n t e n d ed that on a c c u s ed c a n o n ly be present at the t a k i ng of e v i d e n ce on c omm i s s i on in N o r t h e rn Ireland 1>\ s u bm i t t i ng to u n d u ly harsh a nd u n r e a s o n a b le c o n d i t i o n s. It is c o n t e n d ed that, 1>\ c o m- pelling the a c c u s ed to be in c u s t o dy wh i le he is in N o r t h e rn Ireland, the a c c u s ed has to l e a ve the security of the State. Art. 3 8 ( 1 ) , w h i ch states that no person shall be tried on a c r i m i n al c h a r ge save in d ue c o u r se of law, requires just t r e a t me nt for the person c h a r g ed w i th the special right of the S t a te to p r o s e c u t e, a nd to ensure that the a c c u s ed will stand trial. " D u e C o u r se of l aw" s h o u ld me r e ly represent a fair b a l a n ce b e t w e en the e x e r c i se o f i n d i v i d u al f r e e d om, a nd the r e q u i r eme n ts of an o r d e r ed society. T h e a c c u s ed has an u n d o u b t ed right to be present at a nd t h r o u g h o ut his trial, w h i ch will n o rma l ly be held in the S p e c i al C r i m i n al C o u r t. Wh a t is at issue is his right to be present for the t a k i ng for the p u r p o s es of the trial of the e v i d e n ce of w i t n e s s es in N o r t h e rn Ireland. T h is involve* the travelling to N o r t h e rn Ireland of m e mb e rs of the Special C r i m i n al C o u r t, a nd the t a k i ng there of the e v i d e n c e, in their p r e s e n ce b e f o re a N o r t h e rn Ireland N i gh Co u rt J u d g e. Ob v i o u s ly if, as a result of l e a v i ng the jurisdiction, the a c c u s ed is not in c u s t o dy in .Northern I r e l a n d, there is a d a n g er that he m a v not return to stand his trial: a n d, wh i le in c u s t o dy there, the a c c u s ed is a c c o r d ed an i mm u n i ty f r om d e t e n t i on in respect of a nv p r e v i o us o f f e n ce in lie N o r t h. If the a c c u s ed d o es not w i sh to he present, he c an he represented bv a solicitor a nd c o u n s e l. It is to lie n o t ed t h a t, wh i le I K * is in c u s t o d y, the a c c u s ed is p l a c ed u n d er the p r o t e c t i on of the R o y al U l s t er C o n s t a b u l a r y. A c c o r d i n g ly this p r o v i s i on is n ot re- p u g n a nt to Article 4 0 ( 3) of the C o n s t i t u t i o n. ( 2) It w a s also c o n t e n d ed that if the a c c u s ed w as in c u s t o dy wh i le e v i d e n ce w as t a k en in N o r t h e rn Ireland f r om w i t n e s s es resident t h e re c o n s t i t u t es a d e p r i v a t i on of his right of access to lie C o u r ts lor the p u r p o se of o b t a i n i ng hail. T h e g r a n t i ng of hail is not a c o n s t i t u t i o n al right, h ut a m e re r e c o g n i t i on In- die C o u rt t h at a p e r s on p r e s um ed i n n o c e nt shall not h a ve his liberty u n n e c e s s a r i ly interfered w i th p e n d i ng his criminal trial. In People (A.-G.) v. O'Callaghan ( 1 9 6 6 ) I.R. at p. 5 3 3 - Wa l sh J. said t h at f r om time to t i me necessity d e m a n ds that s ome u n c o n v i c t ed p e r s o ns shall he in c u s t o dy p e n d i ng trial to secure their a t t e n d a n ce at the trial, h ut n e c e s s i ty is the o p e r a t i ve test. The a c c u s ed n e ed o n ly go to N o r t h e rn I r e l a nd at li s o w n request, a nd if the o r d er for arrest is m a d e o n a w r o n g basis, it c an be set aside by the H i g h C o u r t. It is c l e ar that the r e q u i r eme nt of c u s t o dy wh i le in N o r t h e rn I r e l a nd is an a b s o l u te necessity. ( 3) It is c o n t e n d ed t h at tin* a c c u s ed is d e p r i v ed of

rights, i n a s mu ch as it he d o es not elect to he present in N o r t h e rn Ireland, his c o u n s el or solicitor h a ve no right to c r o s s - e x am i ne witnesses. T h is c o n t e n t i on is u n s u s t a i n a b l e, as the o p p o r t u n i ty to c r o s s - e x am i ne a nv w . t n e ss is l u n d a m e n t al to a trial in d u e course of law, a nd this right is u n d o u b t e d ly also a v a i l a b le in N o r t h e rn I reland ( 4) S . l l d o es not p r o v i de that a s t a t eme nt of evi- d e n ce i n t e n d ed to be g i v en bv the N o r t h e rn w i t n e ss shall be g i v en to the a c c u s ed b e f o re such e v i d e n c e. Bv v i r t ue ol the Special C r i m i n al C o u rt Ru l es 1976 the a c c u s ed is entitled to a s t a t eme nt of the e v i d e n ce of e a ch w i t n e ss w h o m it is p r o p o s ed to call. T h e C o u rt is satisfied that S . l l must be i n t e r p r e t ed as m a k i ng a person, w h o se e v i d e n ce is to be t a k en on c omm i s s i on on N o r t h e rn Ireland, a witness w h o m it is p r o p o s ed to call. In the m a k i n g ol an o r d er tor the t a k i ng of e v i d e n c e, the S p e c i al C r i m i n al C o u rt has to c o n s i d er the interests of justice, w h i ch w o u ld require a full a nd a d e q u a te dis- closure ol the n a t u re of he e v i d e n ce b e i ng g i v en b e f o r e h a nd to the a c c u s e d. T h i s s u bm i s s i on fails. ( 5) A l t h o u gh it w a s c o n t e n d ed that a s t a t e m e nt of e v i d e n ce m a d e in N o r t h e rn Ireland m i g ht not he an a c c u r a te transcript, the Co u rt is satisfied that a state- m e n t ol e v i d e n ce c o r r e c t ly certified by a N o r t h e rn Ireland H i gh C o u rt J u d ge to be a true a nd a c c u r a te s t a t eme nt of the e v i d e n ce so taken satisfies the require- me n ts of justice. ill) It w as c o n t e n d ed that S . l l did not e x t e nd to e v i d e n ce ol o p i n i on Irom experts. A c c o r d i n g ly an a c c u s ed on trial here w h o w i s h ed to h a ve the e v i d e n ce ol an e x p e rt t a k en in N o r t h e rn Ireland as part of his d e l e n ee w o u ld a l l e g e d ly he h a m p e r ed in his d e f e n c e, l'his s u bm i s s i on is u n s u s t a i n a b l e. ( 7) It w a s c o n t e n d ed that S . l l onlv p r o v i d ed for the transmission ol the a c t u al s t a t e m e nt of e v i d e n c e, a n d did not m e n t i on exhibits. T h i s Co u rt d o es not regard

FORMING A COMPANY? Why Worry?

The Law Society provides a quick service based on a standard form of Memorandum and Articles of Association. Where necessary the standard form can be amended, at an extra charge, to suit the special requirements of any individual case. In addition to private companies limited by shares, the service will also form :— • unlimited companies • companies limited by guarantee. Also shelf companies. Company seals and record books are available at competitive rates.

Full information is available from : COMPANY FORMATION SERVICE

INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY OF IRELAND SOLICITORS' BUILDINGS, FOUR COURTS DUBLIN 7.

123