The Supreme Court allowed Glen Dowling’s appeal and quashed the Minister for Justice’s decision on 23 December 1999 to return him to custody after he was questioned about a suspected murder.
Dowling had been serving a life sentence for murder since 1989. In June 1999, the Minister granted him temporary release, renewable monthly. He was required to report to Mountjoy Prison each month and meet a Probation and Welfare Officer. The judgment says he complied with those conditions up to and including 23 December.
That morning, Dowling was arrested and questioned at Blackrock Garda Station about the suspected murder of Joseph Vickers at Greystones on 13 December 1999. He was released without charge, but returned to Mountjoy that evening and was not released again. The Department said the decision was made because of the serious nature of the suspected offence. A letter in March 2000 said the Minister would not extend his release until the investigation was complete. The judgment records that Gardaí later told the Department no charges would be brought.
The High Court had dismissed Dowling’s application for judicial review. It found that his initial detention after returning from questioning was unlawful because it amounted to revoking his release without giving him a chance to be heard. But it treated the later withholding of release as a refusal to renew a temporary concession, which it said gave him no right to a hearing.
On appeal, the Supreme Court considered the terms of the original release decision. It held that “renewable monthly” did not mean the Minister made a fresh decision each month. The monthly renewals were part of the June decision, and Dowling was to remain on release indefinitely provided he was of good behaviour.
The court noted that questioning about a suspected offence, without more, could not establish a breach of the good-behaviour condition. It said Dowling had been told the reason for the decision and that this satisfied the hearing rule in the circumstances, but the stated reason could not justify ending his release.
The appeal was allowed and an order of certiorari substituted, quashing the Minister’s 23 December 1999 decision to detain him. The ruling concerned the interpretation of the release decision already made; the court said the Minister could not be compelled to grant temporary release in the first place.