The High Court has restrained the Director of Public Prosecutions from taking further steps in a prosecution against Peter Flaherty, following a judicial review application over criminal proceedings arising from events in May 2003.
In a judgment delivered on 13 March 2007, Mr Justice Brian McGovern said the application arose from the same events as separate judicial review proceedings involving Vincent Dodd and Florence Healy. The source does not give the outcome of those other proceedings in this judgment, though the judge said he was applying the same principles as in Healy’s case.
Flaherty had been charged with assault under the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997 and several offences under the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994. The charges arose from his intervention when Dodd was arrested by a Garda on 18 May 2003 in relation to road traffic offences and other matters.
The District Court judge had decided the three cases should be heard together. Flaherty’s solicitor later stated in an affidavit that, on 30 September 2004, Flaherty was ready to proceed despite not having statements made by Garda Sweeney or Gardaí to the Garda Complaints Board. According to the solicitor, he was not permitted to proceed because the District Court judge had directed a joint trial.
The High Court granted Flaherty leave to seek judicial review on 24 July 2006. Mr Justice McGovern said it was then almost four years since the alleged offences. For the reasons he had given in Healy’s case, he held that Flaherty was entitled to judicial review relief restraining the DPP from taking further steps in the prosecution on foot of the summonses identified in specified parts of the statement of grounds.
The judgment does not set out the text of those summonses or the full relief sought. The order described in the judgment is limited to the prosecution against Flaherty and the summonses identified in paragraphs D(1)(a) to (d) of the statement of grounds.