The Court of Criminal Appeal has refused Niall Binead and Kenneth Donohue leave to appeal their convictions for membership of an illegal organisation, upholding the Special Criminal Court’s conclusion that the evidence, considered together, proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The men were convicted in November 2004 of being members of the IRA on 10 October 2002 and each received a four-year prison sentence. Their applications challenged, among other matters, the use of belief evidence from a senior garda, the trial court’s review of confidential material, and inferences drawn from their silence during questioning.
The prosecution case linked the men to events at Corke Abbey, Bray, on the night of the charge. Gardaí had found men and equipment, including disguises and radios, in a Ford Transit van, and false registration plates and other items in a Nissan Almera. Neither applicant was found at the scene. The trial court found Donohue was connected to the events through his control of a Nissan Micra used there and other associations. It found Binead was linked through his thumbprint on binding tape in the Almera and his associations with people connected to the events. The appeal court said the trial court was entitled to find those links proved.
At trial, Chief Superintendent Philip Kelly testified that he believed the applicants were IRA members. He said his belief relied on confidential information and claimed privilege over its sources, citing risks to people’s lives and State security. The Special Criminal Court reviewed material supplied by Kelly, finding it supported his belief and contained nothing that could assist the defence. It also said it had excluded that material when weighing his testimony.
The appeal court held that limiting cross-examination about protected sources did not, by itself, make the trial unfair under the Constitution or Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It found no requirement to appoint a special advocate and concluded that the trial court’s review of the material did not breach the applicants’ fair-trial rights. The appeal court noted that the trial court had not relied on Kelly’s belief alone: it required supporting or corroborating evidence.
The applicants had not answered questions about alleged IRA membership in interviews after being informed of the statutory consequences of failing to answer material questions. The appeal court upheld the trial court’s decision to draw inferences from those failures. It said the comments about the applicants’ demeanour did not invalidate the inferences, which arose from their failure to respond.
The appeal court concluded that the trial court could consider the established facts cumulatively, alongside the inferences and Kelly’s belief evidence, and find the charges proved beyond reasonable doubt. It refused both applications for leave to appeal. The ruling addressed leave to appeal against conviction; the source records no further order changing the convictions or sentences.