The High Court has upheld a District Court decision to send a man’s fitness-to-plead issue to the Dublin Circuit Court, ruling that the Circuit Court alone had jurisdiction to determine it in the circumstances described in the judgment.
The applicant, identified as B. G., was charged with sexual assault, an indictable offence. The judgment said his treating consultant psychiatrist did not consider him fit to stand trial, but Mr Justice Hogan expressly made no finding on his fitness.
The Director of Public Prosecutions had indicated that the charge could be disposed of summarily only if the applicant pleaded guilty and statutory conditions were met. He did not plead guilty, and the District Judge could not be satisfied that he understood the nature of the offence. The District Court therefore could not deal with the fitness issue under the provision covering summary offences and indictable offences being or to be tried summarily, the High Court ruled.
Under the applicable provision of the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006, the District Court was required to send the applicant to the court where he would have been tried if fit. The High Court said that was the Circuit Court, which alone had jurisdiction to determine fitness to plead. It upheld District Judge Catherine Murphy’s decision to send him forward on bail for that purpose.
The applicant also argued that two transfer orders contained errors, including omissions about the offence and venue and an incorrect description of the signing judge. Mr Justice Hogan accepted that neither order was satisfactory, but declined to quash them. He said they were procedural, the parties understood what the District Judge intended, no real disadvantage had been shown, and the orders could have been put right by the District Court.
The judgment did not decide whether the applicant was fit to plead or whether he committed the alleged offence. Nor did it resolve the applicant’s constitutional argument that the statutory interpretation could leave him unable to plead guilty in the District Court after a fitness determination and thereby access its lower sentencing range. The judge said that issue would proceed to argument and adjudication in the next phase. Any European Convention on Human Rights issue was also left open if necessary.