Restriction on court papers angers NUJ

The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) is to lodge a formal complaint to the Courts Service over the decision of a District Court judge to limit journalists' access to court papers.

The district justice for Co Clare, Judge Joseph Mangan, has issued a direction to Courts Service staff to deny reporters access to any court documents. He told them that if reporters wished to view court documents, an application must be made to him. No reason was given for the decision.

In covering the courts, reporters routinely gain access from court clerks to court documents, including summonses and charge sheets.

The move by Judge Mangan provoked an angry response from the Irish secretary of the NUJ, Seamus Dooley, who said the NUJ was lodging a formal complaint.

"It is unacceptable behaviour that runs contrary to recent developments by the Courts Service where it has led the way in allowing information relating to court business to be accessed to the public through journalists.

"The judge's action is completely at variance with Courts Service policy, and it is extremely unacceptable that one judge should act in an arbitrary manner on this issue where he operates his court area like his own private fiefdom." Mr Dooley said Judge Mangan was not acting in the public interest.

"The NUJ has been campaigning for a long time for greater access to court documents, and we would view this move as a retrograde step. I am not aware of any legal procedure where a judge can grant or refuse access to court orders to journalists.

"Essentially, what the judge is doing is depriving the public access to the vast majority of cases in his court and turning these cases into in-camera cases.Without the necessary checks available, journalists can't function in the courts."

NUI Galway media lecturer Marie McGonagle said yesterday journalists were the eyes and ears of the public in covering courts.

"The judge's direction goes against the letter and spirit of the Supreme Court judgement Irish Times versus Judge Murphy, and the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission. I cannot understand on what basis the judge could make such a direction, and I don't know what possible justification there can be."