Chief Justice begins inquiry into Sheedy case

Inquiries are being carried out under the direction of the Chief Justice, Mr Justice Hamilton, into the circumstances surrounding…

Inquiries are being carried out under the direction of the Chief Justice, Mr Justice Hamilton, into the circumstances surrounding the case of Philip Sheedy, the Dublin architect whose four-year jail sentence was partially suspended in controversial circumstances.

Contacted by The Irish Times yesterday, the Chief Justice said: "Inquiries are being conducted into the matters surrounding the case, and I will have no statement to make until the inquiries are completed."

In a separate development, it was last night confirmed that the Minister for Justice, Mr O'Donoghue, was also conducting inquiries, "in view of the very serious suggestions that have been made concerning the circumstances of the hearing of this case". He is expected to make a statement on his findings shortly.

The case has provoked such intense political consternation that Fine Gael has threatened that, unless a satisfactory explanation is forthcoming, it may seek to invoke impeachment procedures.

READ MORE

Under Article 35.4.1 of the Constitution, a judge of the Supreme Court or the High Court can be removed for stated misbehaviour or incapacity by means of a resolution passed by the Dail and Seanad calling for his or her dismissal. The article has never been used since the Constitution was drafted in 1937.

The President of the Circuit Court, Judge Esmond Smyth, and the President of the High Court, Mr Justice Morris, are also understood to be joining in the Chief Justice's inquiries, which began with the termination of the judicial review proceedings involving Sheedy last week.

In the Dail, Fine Gael and Labour last night tabled dozens of questions about the case of Sheedy, who was found guilty in October 1997 of dangerous driving causing the death of a young mother, Mrs Anne Ryan, in March 1996. In addition to being jailed for four years, he was also disqualified from driving for 12 years.

Sentencing Sheedy, Judge Joseph Mathews set a review date of October 1999. However, within weeks Sheedy successfully had that review date "vacated" or set aside by the same judge.

In the Dublin Circuit Court judge on November 12th last, Judge Cyril Kelly suspended the outstanding three years of Sheedy's sentence. Unusually, neither the DPP nor the Garda had been alerted that the case was before the courts again.

It is understood that, just days before the case was dealt with, a call was made on behalf of a senior court official to the Circuit Court office which organises the court lists. He requested that Sheedy's case be listed for hearing on a specific date, and this was dealt with by Judge Kelly.

On learning that Sheedy was free, the DPP sought a judicial review, which was heard last Thursday. The defendant withdrew his opposition to the application and returned to prison voluntarily.

Last night, in an adjournment debate in the Dail, Fine Gael's spokesman on justice, Mr Jim Higgins, put 22 questions to the Minister for Justice, Mr O'Donghue, asking him to state who actually ordered the Sheedy case to be listed last November. He also sought answers on Judge Kelly's role in the affair and pointed out that the judge was promoted to the High Court 12 days after the Sheedy hearing.

"Somebody somewhere in the pyramid of responsibility and accountability in the courts and judicial system made certain decisions in relation to the Philip Sheedy case. We must know who made these decisions, when they were made and why they were made", Mr Higgins said.

According to Labour's justice spokesman, Mr Brendan Howlin, the case "raises disturbing questions as to whether there was any improper interference with the administration of criminal justice by the courts". Since Sheedy was back in jail, there was "a danger that we might never discover what it is that actually took place".

It was an elementary principle of judicial practice that one judge would not "interfere" with a case which should properly be before a colleague of the same court.

"It is also the most basic rule of natural justice that, in any case, both sides must be heard", Mr Howlin added, referring to the fact that the DPP and gardai were not represented when Sheedy's sentence was partially suspended.