Prisoner wins right of direct access to journalists

Patrick "Dutchy" Holland, who is serving a 12-year prison sentence for drug offences, has won the right to be interviewed by …

Patrick "Dutchy" Holland, who is serving a 12-year prison sentence for drug offences, has won the right to be interviewed by media in Portlaoise Prison about his claim that he was the subject of a miscarriage of justice.

Mr Justice McKechnie, in the High Court yesterday, said he knew of no authority for the Irish Prison Service's long-standing policy not to allow prisoners direct access to the media and he could not find any specific exclusion dealing with the media in the prison rules.

Holland was sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment by the Special Criminal Court in November 1997 and in June 1998 the sentence was reduced to 12 years by the Court of Criminal Appeal. He alleges that certain gardaí deliberately withheld vital documents from the courts, which would have demonstrated that the main prosecution witness against him committed perjury.

He also claims that "alleged" admissions made by himself while in Garda custody were forged and concocted by one or more gardaí, who were the same as those who "collaborated" with other gardaí in the McBrearty case in Donegal.

READ MORE

Holland hopes to have members of the media meet him in the prison with a view to investigating his claims, but the governor has refused such meetings.

The prison authorities claim it has been long-standing policy not to allow prisoners direct access or communication with the media. The Prison Service takes the view it is not in the interests of security or good order to do so.

Mr Justice McKechnie, in a reserved judgment on Holland's application for a judicial review of the governor's decision, said the application was strictly confined to securing the media to highlight his case. Holland had no objection to the governor placing reasonable restrictions.

The judge said what was strikingly absent from this case was detailed verification of the concerns which the governor might have under the heading of security and good order.

Because of the governor's approach to Holland's request, it followed there was but one reason for refusing every request made by every prisoner (long-standing prison policy). He knew of no authority, and none had been advanced, for the proposition that the Irish Prison Service had any legal entitlement to establish such a practice or policy, which, on it's own, could decide the position of a prisoner.

The governor's position was based on a policy derived from an interpretation and working of rules concerning the interests of security and good order within a prison, and also on the desire to prevent any further trauma to victims and their families.

In addition, the governor claimed there could not be scope for individualism, because of the absolute requirement of consistency of treatment of all prisoners.

Mr Justice McKechnie said he could not find in the prison rules any specific exclusion dealing with the media either by way of personal visits or correspondence. He could not find any rule which allowed the governor to refuse a prisoner in any circumstance to deal with the media. The governor had not satisfied the court as to a necessity for such a blanket ban, which was entirely disproportionate to the penal objective which he sought to maintain.

Mr Justice McKechnie added that journalists had played a vital part in operating a vibrant democracy with regard to alleged breaches or alleged miscarriages of justice.

Holland's claims were at the allegations stage and nothing else, and no conclusion could be drawn from those allegations and no inference taken as against any organ of the State.

The judge said he would not refer the matter back through the prison governor, but leave it open to Holland if he so wishes to make further requests.