O'Maicin (Iarrataasor) v Eire (Freagroiri)

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Bhreithimh Roderick Murphy
• Judgment Date: 14 May 2010
• Neutral Citation: [2010] IEHC 179
• Court: High Court
• Date: 14 May 2010

[2010] IEHC 179

AN ARD-CH ÚIRT

[Uimhir 751 JR/2009]

Ó Maicín v Éire & Ors

ATHBHREITHNI Ú BREITHI ÚNACH

IDIR/

PEADAR Ó MAICÍN

IARRATASOIR

AGUS

ÉIRE, AGUS AN t-ARD-AIGHNE, AN t-AIRE DLÍ AGUS CIRT, COMHIONANNAIS AGUS ATHCH ÓIRITHE DLÍ, AN BREITHEAMH CUARDA RAYMOND GROARKE, AGUS AN STI ÚRTH ÓIR IONCH ÚISEAMH POIBLÍ

FREAGR ÓIRÍ

JURIES ACT 1976 S5(2)

JURIES ACT 1976 S12

NON-FATAL OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON ACT 1997 S3

FIREARMS & OFFENSIVE WEAPONS ACT 1990 S11

JURIES ACT 1976 S5

COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT 1924 S44

RSC O.86

COURTS & COURT OFFICERS ACT 1995 S4

CRIMINAL LAW

Trial

Jury selection - Entitlement to bilingual jury-Prohibition on restriction of jurors -- Power to divide and/or limit jury district - de Burca v Attorney General [1976] 1 IR 38 applied - Juries Act 1976 (No 4), s 5 - Claim dismissed (2009/751JR - Murphy J - 14/5/2010) [2010] IEHC 179

Ó Maicín v Éire

Facts: The applicant was charged with assault and his application for a bilingual jury had been refused. The applicant wished to prepare, run and govern the case in Irish, referring to population studies as to the linguistic makeup of the population of Galway. He argued that the standard of interpretation supplied had been very poor. The applicant sought three reliefs by way of judicial review, namely to have a bi-lingual jury who could hear evidence in Irish without the help of an interpreter, drawn from the people of Galway county as a constitutional jury. He sought inter alia a declaration that he was so entitled and an order requiring the Minister to take the necessary steps to have a bilingual jury in a new jury district pursuant to s. 5(2) Juries Act 1976 and also a declaration that the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeal be made available in Irish.

Held by Murphy J. that a selection according to linguistic ability would create a bias within a jury that was not in accordance with s. 5 of the Juries Act 1976. It was beyond the power of the Court to intervene with the powers of the Minister to exercise his discretion pursuant to s. 5(2) of the Act. The Court would refuse the reliefs sought. The Court would not prohibit the continuation of the indictment.

Reporter: E.F.

1 BREITHI ÚNAS an Bhreithimh Roderick Murphytugtha ar on 14ú lá de Mí na Bealtaine, 2010.

1. Claim

2 2 1.1 By application for judicial review dated 13 ^th July, 2009, the applicant sought three reliefs.

3 The first of these was to have a bi-lingual jury who could hear evidence in Irish and in English without the help of an interpreter drawn from the people of Galway county as a constitutional jury. He sought a further declaration that he was so entitled and in order for certiorari in relation to the order of his Honour Judge Groarke.

4 He also looked for an order against the third defendant, the Minister for Justice, to take all necessary steps to have a bilingual jury in a new jury district under s. 5(2) of the Juries Act 1976 and/or to cause a new written summons to be made by regulations under s. 12 of the same Act.

5 The applicant also sought a declaration that there was a constitutional requirement on the State and the Attorney General and Minister to publish the rules of the Circuit Court in the first official language.

6 Since the proceedings commenced the Minister has published the Rules of the Circuit Court in Irish though without some of the amendments thereto. Accordingly as this mater is now met the Court refuses to grant that relief.

7 The applicant also sought a declaration to have the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeal available in the first language before his trial on indictment number 761033 and number 812952.

8 Finally, the applicant sought an order of prohibition on the continuation of the indictment no. 761033 until the determination of the judicial review.

9 By order of O'Neill J. on 13 ^th July, 2009, leave was given to the applicant to apply for judicial review on the basis of the grounds detailed in the statement.

10 2 1.2 The applicant had been charged as Peadar Macken, with date of birth 21 ^st April, 1953, that:

"On 28/05/2008 at Beal an Daingean, Leitir Móir, Galway in the said district court area of Doire an Fhéich, district number 7, assaulted one Martin Whelan causing him harm.

Contrary to section 3 of the Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997

and

on 28/05/2008 at Beal an Daingean, Leitir Móir, Galway within the said District Court area of Doire an Fhéich, district number 7, you did while committing assault on Martin Whelan in the course of a fight produced in a manner likely unlawfully to intimidate another person an article capable of inflicting serious injury, to wit, a broken whiskey bottle,

contrary to section 11 Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act 1990."

11 3 1.3 The matter came before the Circuit Court, Western Circuit, County of Galway, record No. A05/09 between the Director of Public Prosecutions, as prosecutor and Peadar Macken, as accused.

12 The matter was heard by the fifth named respondent, his Honour Judge Groarke on 29 ^th May, 2009. The Court noted submissions on behalf of the Director that evidence would be electronically recorded in the language in which it was given at the trial of the accused. The Court ordered:

13 (1) That the application for a bilingual jury for the trial herein be refused.

14 (2) That the matter be adjourned for mention to Galway Circuit Criminal Court sitting on Tuesday, the 6 ^th day of October, 2009.

2. Applicant's evidence

15 2 2.1 By affidavit filed 13 ^th July, 2009, the applicant with an address at Bothar na Trá Iachtareacht, Gaillimh, referred to the first mentioned charge and by supplemental affidavit to the second mentioned charge.

16 He said he was a native Irish speaker. Although born in Dublin he had gone to Ros Muc when he was three years of age where he was brought up and learned English at school but did not acquire mastery in that language until his teens.

17 He referred to the allegation that he had assaulted a person on 28 ^th May, 2008 in Beal an Daingean, Leitir Móir, Connemara, being part of the Gaelteacht. He said he was not guilty and would strongly resist the charge. He said he wished to prepare, run, govern and manage the case in Irish which was his native language, the national language and the first language of the State. He was advised and he believed that he had a constitutional right to do so.

18 He referred to his request on 23 ^rd March, 2009, to have the book of evidence in Irish and noted that the Director of Public Prosecutions indicated on 29 ^th May, 2009, that this would be made available.

19 In relation to a bilingual jury he said that he had not received an answer from the Director and understood that the case was going ahead in English as the counsel for the Director...