A Supreme Court decision yesterday has cleared the way for the speedier prosecution on charges of child sex abuse of people who had sought to prevent their trials on the grounds of delay in making complaints of abuse.
As a result of the five-judge court's unanimous decision, the DPP will no longer have to call evidence, particularly psychiatric evidence, to justify delays in making complaints of abuse. Until now, the onus had been on the DPP, not the alleged abuser, to explain the reason for delays.
The consequent need for compilation of psychiatric reports had also led to lengthy delays in many cases in the hearing of High Court judicial review applications brought by alleged abusers aimed at stopping their trials.
In a judgment with implications for a large number of forthcoming and potential prosecutions, the Supreme Court ruled that it is no longer necessary to establish the reasons for a delay between the alleged abuse and the bringing of charges against the accused.
It indicated that an accused would have to establish prejudice to their right to a fair trial before a court would restrain their prosecution.
Giving the court's judgment, Chief Justice Mr Justice John Murray said the court was satisfied that, in general, there is no necessity to hold an inquiry into or to establish the reasons for delay in making a complaint of sexual abuse.
"The issue for a court is whether the delay has resulted in prejudice to an accused so as to give rise to a real or serious risk of an unfair trial. The court does not exclude wholly exceptional circumstances where it would be unfair or unjust to put an accused on trial," he said.
The court was giving its judgment on an appeal by a former teacher at a Dublin school who faces 50 charges of indecent assault on four boys, who were then aged between seven and 10 years and were in his care in the 1960s. The man went to the High Court to prevent his prosecution and claimed there was a substantial risk of an unfair trial because of the lapse of time between the dates of the alleged offences and the date of his proposed trial.
The High Court was told no formal complaint was made against the man before May 1999. The court refused in July 2004 to grant orders preventing the man's trial and he appealed against that decision to the Supreme Court.
In its judgment the Supreme Court said that the wave of prosecutions relating to child sex abuse which arrived in the courts in the 1990s was a new phenomenon and the development of the law reflected changes in society where issues of child sexual abuse were discussed widely and openly for the first time and prosecutions were brought in relation to events which occurred many years ago.
The courts had developed jurisprudence to meet the growing number and knowledge of cases on child sexual abuse, it said.
"The court's experience extends to a broader set of issues and it has found that there is a range of circumstances extending beyond dominion or psychological consequences flowing directly from the abuse which militates or inhibits victims from bringing complaints of sexual abuse to the notice of other people, in particular those outside their family and even more particularly the gardaí with a view to a possible trial.
"Over the last decade the courts have had extensive experience of cases where complaints are made of alleged sexual abuse which is stated to have taken place many, many years ago. It is an unfortunate truth that such cases are routinely part of the list in criminal courts today."
The core issue was not so much the reason for a delay in making a complaint but whether the accused would receive a fair trial, the court said.
Mr Justice Murray said the court considered it is no longer a necessity to inquire into the reason for a delay in making a complaint. The prosecutions in question had come before the courts after a decision to prosecute had been made by the DPP, who is independent in the performance of his functions.