Judges will allow CCTV, mobile phone evidence in Kevin Lunney case

Published date08 July 2021
AuthorEoin Reynolds
Publication titleIrish Times: Web Edition Articles (Dublin, Ireland)
The court rejected arguments made by lawyers for the four men accused of the abduction and assault that the use of mobile phone evidence amounted to mass surveillance and that gardaí were using private CCTV systems to operate a "de facto surveillance system".

A 40-year-old man known as YZ, Alan O'Brien (40), of Shelmalier Road, East Wall, Dublin 3, Darren Redmond (27), from Caledon Road, East Wall, Dublin 3 and Luke O'Reilly (67), with an address at Mullahoran Lower, Kilcogy, Co Cavan have all pleaded not guilty to false imprisonment and intentionally causing serious harm to Mr Lunney at Drumbrade, Ballinagh, Co Cavan on September 17th, 2019.

Mr Lunney, a director of Quinn Industrial Holdings, has told the court that he was bundled into the boot of a car near his home and driven to a container where he was threatened and told to resign as a director of Quinn Industrial Holdings.

His abductors cut him with a Stanley knife, stripped him to his boxer shorts, doused him in bleach, broke his leg with two blows of a wooden bat, beat him on the ground, cut his face and scored the letters QIH into his chest. They left him bloodied, beaten and shivering on a country road at Drumcoghill in Co Cavan where he was discovered by a man driving a tractor.

The defence lawyers had argued that the mass retention of mobile phone data, showing the locations of phones, and incoming and outgoing calls and texts, was a breach of privacy rights guaranteed under the European Charter on Fundamental Rights.

Mr Justice Hunt said the objective of fighting serious crime justifies the retention and accessing of mobile phone data. He said there is "no bright line" set out by EU directives or rulings that state retention of mobile phone data is prohibited in all cases.

He said the objective of legislation permitting retention of phone data must balance the potential interference with privacy rights with the requirement to detect, investigate and prosecute serious crime. He pointed to a recent ruling of Chief Justice Frank Clarke that concluded that if mass retention were not permitted, the rights of victims of crime would be "set at nought".

While the court found that retaining and accessing mobile phone data is an interference with fundamental rights, the Irish government had allowed it in legislation aimed at preventing and investigating serious offences, safeguarding the security of the State and safeguarding human life.

Privacy rights

In the interests of combating serious crime, the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT