The Supreme Court has overturned a High Court refusal of bail to Colm Maguire, ruling that the anticipated length of time he would spend in custody awaiting trial had to be considered when his application was assessed.
Maguire was charged before the Special Criminal Court on October 10, 2003 with membership of an unlawful organisation. Bail was initially refused on grounds including the risk that he might commit a serious offence if released.
He remained in custody while extensions were granted for service of the Book of Evidence. That book was eventually served on March 5, 2004 and his trial was fixed for June 2005, meaning that if he remained detained he faced about 20 months in custody before trial.
Maguire was also charged in March 2004 with two firearms offences. The Special Criminal Court granted bail on those charges, leaving him detained solely on the original membership charge.
The High Court subsequently refused his renewed bail application. It held that sections 2 and 3 of the Bail Act 1997 confined the court largely to factors expressly listed in the legislation and to delay attributable to the prosecutor.
Mr Justice Hardiman, delivering the Supreme Court judgment, rejected that narrow interpretation.
The court held that the 1997 Act added a new basis on which bail could be refused but did not displace the courts’ wider and longstanding bail jurisdiction. The likely duration of pre-trial imprisonment remained a relevant factor because of the constitutional right to personal liberty and the right to trial within a reasonable time.
The Supreme Court also held that, on a renewed application after four months, the interests of justice required consideration of the actual period an accused was likely to spend in custody, whether or not the delay was directly caused by the Director of Public Prosecutions.
The court did not itself grant Maguire bail. Instead, it set aside the refusal and sent the application back to the High Court for fresh consideration under the correct legal test.