The High Court has ruled that the State must make reasonable efforts to assign a bilingual Irish-English District Court judge when an accused person wants to present his side of a criminal case in Irish. The ruling arose from a judicial review brought by Diarmaid Ó Cadhla, who was facing summary criminal proceedings in Cork.
In a judgment delivered on 20 June 2019, Ms Justice Ní Raifeartaigh said Article 8 of the Constitution required the State to do more than provide an interpreter. The obligation was to make at least some effort to find a bilingual judge, where an accused asked to conduct his part of the case in Irish. The judge said the duty was no lower than making reasonable efforts or assigning such a judge so far as practicable.
Ó Cadhla said Irish was his native language and that he wished to conduct his case in Irish. He faced five summonses containing charges of criminal damage. At District Court appearances in November and December 2017, he asked for a judge who understood Irish. District Judge Olann Kelleher refused the request. An interpreter attended, and the judge said Ó Cadhla could give evidence and cross-examine witnesses in Irish, but had no right to a judge who spoke the language. The judge entered a not-guilty plea on his behalf and adjourned the proceedings.
The High Court rejected the State’s argument that interpretation alone exhausted its obligations under Article 8. It found that the Supreme Court had not previously decided whether an accused had a right to have a bilingual decision-maker in this specific District Court context. The judge distinguished earlier cases concerning Irish-speaking juries, where the requirement for a representative jury presented a competing constitutional consideration.
The court granted certiorari, quashing the District Court judge’s refusal to provide an Irish-speaking judge. It did not settle the precise wording of a declaration: the judge said she was open to further argument, with her inclination being to declare that the first respondent had a duty to make reasonable efforts to assign a bilingual judge for Ó Cadhla’s forthcoming criminal trial. The judgment did not order that a particular judge be assigned, or resolve the underlying criminal charges.
The State had not presented evidence of resource constraints or practical obstacles. The judge observed that the number of cases involving Irish-language interpretation had been small and that assigning a bilingual judge had generally been the practice. She said practical difficulties could be raised in another case.