The High Court has ordered the immediate reimprisonment of Enoch Burke, less than a week after the schoolteacher was released from Mountjoy jail.
Mr Burke was brought before Mr Justice Brian Cregan on Monday hours after gardaí arrested him at Wilson’s Hospital School. The judge had ordered his arrest on Friday following his breach of a court direction prohibiting his attendance at the Co Westmeath school.
Following an application by lawyers for the school, Mr Justice Cregan said he was satisfied that Mr Burke had attended at the school on Thursday and Friday last week, in “flagrant breach” of court orders. The judge found Mr Burke to be in contempt of court, and ordered his immediate committal to Mountjoy.
The developments came after Mr Justice Cregan on Wednesday ordered Mr Burke’s release from Mountjoy, where he has spent some 560 days over the last three years in custody for his repeated breach of the order banning him from the school.
READ MORE
The judge had ordered his release to give the teacher an opportunity to prepare a new case he is bringing in relation to the composition of an appeal panel that will hear an appeal against his dismissal from the school.
His release was ordered despite Mr Burke informing the judge he would return to the school the following morning. Mr Burke made good on this assertion.
Mr Burke’s formal dismissal from the school some three years ago arose out of conduct following his refusal to comply with a direction from the school’s then principal to address a transgender pupil by a new name.
Mr Burke has repeatedly claimed his jailing arises from his views on transgender issues, and that his religious and constitutional rights have been breached.
Several judges have told Mr Burke he was jailed for breaching a court order not to trespass on the school grounds, and that it was not about his religious or constitutional rights, but the rule of law.
At Monday’s hearing, barrister Rosemary Mallon, appearing for Wilson’s Hospital School, opened a statement sworn by the school’s principal Noel Cunningham outlining Mr Burke’s attendance at the school last week, and the impact on the school’s operation.
Mr Cunningham noted the attendance of protesters at the school’s gates coinciding with Mr Burke’s trespassing, and said he believed “the atmosphere” there to be “at times quite unpleasant”. The principal said he had received complaints from parents and teachers in relation to individuals standing at the school gates, and safety issues arising from same.
Since Mr Burke’s release from prison last week, Mr Cunningham said he had to engage a security company at short notice, contact An Garda Síochána twice and listen to complaints about safety issues at the school gates. He said these were not usual tasks for a principal, and arose from Mr Burke’s contempt of court orders.
Ms Mallon submitted that it was clear that Mr Burke was in contempt of the order prohibiting his attendance at the school.
Replying to the school’s application, Mr Burke told the judge he was not in contempt of court – rather, he had utmost respect for the courts. Mr Justice Cregan said this was “nonsense”.
Mr Burke said that at last week’s hearing, following the judge’s ordering his release from prison, he told the judge “exactly what [his] intentions were”. He said he turned up at his “place of work” on Thursday and Friday.
In response, Mr Justice Cregan told Mr Burke he had been dismissed from his post at the school. “What part of that sentence do you not understand?” the judge asked. “Who on Earth turns up where they’ve been dismissed?”
Mr Burke said it was “grossly and manifestly wrong” that he was suspended from his employment. “There was no gross misconduct,” he said.
Mr Burke repeated complaints about the original order by Mr Justice Alexander Owens prohibiting his attendance at the school, claiming it was “manifestly wrong”. The judge noted that Mr Burke had not appealed this order.
At the outset of the hearing, Ms Mallon outlined comments made by school principal Mr Cunningham in his affidavit, addressing a Sunday Independent article published over the weekend, and an interview he gave to the newspaper for the purposes of the piece.
Mr Cunningham said the school’s board of management was not aware of his participation in the article, and had not consented to an interview.
Mr Cunningham said he appreciated it was inappropriate for him to speak to any journalist in relation to ongoing litigation. He said he participated in the interview in a “misguided” attempt to give the school some good publicity.
He said he wished to apologise to the court for the article.
In his submissions to the court, Mr Burke said the article was “about me and my workplace”, and the gist of the piece was that his attendance at the school doesn’t affect the “day to day” situation, and that it is a happy place with people “getting on with it”.
Mr Cunningham’s statement to the court was “diametrically opposed” to the contents of the article, Mr Burke said, claiming the affidavit contained a “different set of facts” relating to the impact of Mr Burke’s attendance at the school.
He claimed Mr Cunningham was in his affidavit “backtracking” on comments made to the Sunday Independent at the behest of the school’s lawyers.
