The High Court has refused a judicial review challenge by Stephen Rock to the revocation of his temporary release from prison, finding that the circumstances provided for an inquiry sufficient to meet fair-procedure requirements. The court also said that, even if there had been a procedural irregularity, the release period had since expired and quashing the decision would bring no practical benefit.
Mr Rock, who is serving a life sentence for murder, had been granted successive periods of temporary release from 2012. His latest two-week release began on 8 July 2014 and was due to end on 22 July. Its conditions included good behaviour and keeping the peace, and the form stated that it did not entitle him to further release.
On 12 July, he was arrested in connection with an alleged arson at a home whose occupants were inside. He was later charged with arson and criminal damage and is awaiting trial. The judgment records that the District Court granted him bail despite Garda opposition. Two days later, Gardaí brought him from Priorswood House in Coolock, where he was required to reside, back to prison. He was transferred from Arbour Hill Prison to the Midlands Prison on 16 July.
Mr Rock sought an order quashing the revocation, arguing that there had been no proper hearing into whether he had breached his release conditions. The respondents accepted that no formal hearing had taken place, but argued that he had been told the reason for his return to prison and had acknowledged responsibility during a meeting with Chief Officer Roche.
Mr Rock denied making the remark attributed to him. The judge noted that no application had been made to cross-examine Mr Roche, leaving the conflict unresolved. The judgment also records that Mr Rock did not challenge the revocation until September. The court said this delay was relevant to its assessment of his account.
The judge distinguished the case from earlier decisions requiring an inquiry before temporary release could be revoked. He concluded that, given the evidence of the meeting and the circumstances, an inquiry sufficient to meet fair-procedure requirements had taken place. The judgment did not determine whether Mr Rock committed the alleged arson; he remained awaiting trial on those charges.
The court also rejected the argument that any invalidity in the July revocation would make later non-renewal of temporary release invalid. It cited the 2003 statutory provision that a temporary release does not create an entitlement to further release. The application was refused.