The High Court has refused a prisoner’s application for judicial review of the Minister for Justice and Equality’s decision not to grant him enhanced remission. Mr Justice Paul Coffey also refused his request for discovery of a Garda document referred to in the Minister’s decision letter.
The applicant was serving a ten-year sentence for aggravated burglary. He sought enhanced remission under Rule 59(2) of the Prison Rules, which gives the Minister discretion to grant remission of more than one quarter and up to one third of a sentence where the prisoner has engaged in authorised structured activity and the Minister is satisfied the prisoner is less likely to reoffend and better able to reintegrate.
The Minister refused the application in July 2017. The decision letter acknowledged the applicant’s participation in some authorised structured activity but cited the nature and gravity of the offence, the potential threat to public safety and security, and the Garda view. The applicant argued that relying primarily on the offence’s nature and gravity was arbitrary, capricious and unjust because those were static matters he could not address through prison activity.
The court first considered the request for discovery of the material underlying the Garda view. It held that discovery in this type of judicial review requires an evidential basis showing that the document is needed to resolve a live issue arising from circumstances that could make the Minister’s reliance on the Garda view arbitrary, capricious or unjust. The court found no such basis: the request was speculative, and there was no evidence suggesting the Garda view was inconsistent with other evidence or otherwise improper. It therefore refused discovery without reaching the privilege issue.
On the challenge to the refusal, the judge held that the seriousness and circumstances of the offence were relevant to assessing the risk posed by a prisoner’s release and the value of subsequent prison activities as a guide to future conduct. The judgment also noted that the applicant had not acknowledged guilt until February 2017 and had not assisted Gardaí in efforts to bring the other three perpetrators before the courts.
The court concluded that the facts and circumstances of the aggravated burglary were sufficiently serious and alarming to justify refusing enhanced remission on their own. It refused the judicial review application. The ruling did not grant remission or direct the Minister to reconsider the application.