Youth Defence convictions for obstructing gardai and breaching public order at protest overturned

Members of the antiabortion group, Youth Defence, have overturned convictions of obstructing gardai and breaching the Public …

Members of the antiabortion group, Youth Defence, have overturned convictions of obstructing gardai and breaching the Public Order Act at a protest two years ago. Mr Maurice Colgan, Mr Justin Barrett, Mr Christopher Palin, Ms Ciara Ni Aodain, Ms Esme Caulfield and Mr Michael Quinn had appealed convictions and sentences ranging from fines to orders to carry out community work.

Judge Bryan McMahon al lowed the appeals of Mr Quinn, Mr Palin and Ms Caulfield on charges of having obstructed gar dai but dismissed appeals by Mr Barrett, Ms Ni Aodain and Mr Colgan. He dismissed an appeal by Mr Quinn against breaching the Public Order Act.

The judge acceded to an application by Mr Garrett Cooney SC, for the six appellants, to apply the Probation Act in all appeals which had not been allowed.

Mr Cooney said the incidents involved people of good character who had been caught up in what could best be described as an unfortunate incident.

READ MORE

The judge warned all parties concerned that there were lessons to be learned on both sides. He said constitutional rights had to be respected by everyone.

The proceedings arose out of incidents outside the Adelaide Hospital, Dublin, on May 15th, 1998, when Youth Defence, an organisation formed to oppose abortion, mounted a demonstration to promote its objectives. A melee broke out when gardai moved to arrest some of the demonstrators who had been chanting outside the hospital entrance and carried placards bearing slogans and photographs of foetuses.

While the protest had been amiable and non-threatening, concerns had been expressed about the stress being caused to seriously ill patients within the hospital. Trouble began when gardai moved to arrest some protesters and had been obstructed by others.

Judge McMahon said the issue of abortion had aroused strong feelings and deep convictions, but the case was not about the right to life, it was about the right to assemble and communicate.

In evidence, gardai said they had been subjected to violence in carrying out lawful arrests while the appellants had claimed the gardai had used more force than reasonably necessary.