The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal by the Commissioner of An Garda Síochána and the Director of Public Prosecutions and affirmed an order quashing two search warrants issued for the home of journalist Emmett Corcoran and the offices of The Democrat newspaper.
The warrants were issued on 2 April 2019 under section 10 of the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1997. The Supreme Court judgment, delivered on 22 June 2023, says the Garda applications did not adequately inform the District Court judge that Corcoran was a working journalist and newspaper editor, or that the searches could expose confidential sources and unrelated journalistic material.
The proceedings arose from a violent incident at Falsk, Strokestown, County Roscommon, in the early hours of 16 December 2018, involving attacks on people and property and vehicles being set on fire. Corcoran told Gardaí he had travelled to the scene after receiving what he described as “tip offs” from confidential journalistic sources. He said he had photographed and filmed the aftermath, and uploaded footage to The Democrat’s website.
At an interview under caution, Corcoran declined to identify his sources or the device he had used. He said he would provide copies of the photographs, and on 20 December 2018 gave Gardaí a USB stick containing footage and photographs. The later warrant applications referred to that material and sought an iPhone 6 or other devices, saying they might contain further footage that could help identify suspects.
Justice Maurice Collins said the applications did not disclose that Corcoran had voluntarily attended an interview, acknowledged being at the scene, and provided what he said was all the footage and photographs he had taken. They also did not clearly state that the search might be aimed at identifying his sources or could give investigators access to other journalistic material. Those omissions prevented the issuing judge from making an informed assessment of the potential interference with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The court held that, where a section 10 warrant could interfere with protection of a journalist’s sources, the judge must be told and must assess whether the public interest justifies that interference. Collins J said the warrants were invalid because essential information had not been disclosed. The court did not decide whether the Irish Constitution independently protects journalistic sources, and it did not rule that every warrant search of a journalist’s premises is impermissible.
Collins J also highlighted shortcomings in section 10, including the lack of powers to narrow a warrant or attach safeguards for journalistic material, and said the matter required urgent attention by the Oireachtas. The judgment records the court’s agreement that the warrants should be quashed and the appeal dismissed.