Committee probe on judge 'doomed to failure'
An Oireachtais Committee set up to probe the conduct of Circuit Court Judge Brian Curtin was doomed to failure, a court heard today.
Lawyers for Judge Curtin told the High Court in Dublin that the joint committee had no fact finding powers and would only produce a resumé of evidence.
The committee, chaired by Fianna Fáil TD Dennis O’Donovan, was formed last summer after the Government passed a motion to remove the judge for stated misbehaviour.
The 51-year-old was acquitted by a jury on the direction of Tralee Circuit Court on the charge of possession of child pornography.
It emerged during the hearing last April that the warrant used to seize his computer was out of date.
The Government intended to create the joint committee to present a report to the Dáil before calling a vote on the judge’s future.
John Rodgers SC, for Curtin, told the court the select committee would offer no decision on how to deal with Judge Curtin.
Mr Rodgers SC said in effect 166 Deputies sitting in Leinster House would have free rein to flick through the transcripts of evidence.
“We say my Lord that from the word go it was a go wrong,” Mr Rodgers SC said.
“It’s a big statement to make, my Lord, but it is the case to make because, in effect, we say my Lord that the whole process failed to deliver a decision-making mechanism.”
Mr Rodgers also told the court that the enormity of what was being suggested was utterly repugnant.
He said that the committee report and a Dáil vote on the judge’s future would be based on unfounded testimony.
The senior counsel told the court that Judge Curtin could be called to appear before the committee implicating himself, a tradition which had been abandoned by the judicial system three centuries ago.
“There could not be a more important case in defining what I would call that very nuance, area of law, the relationship between the judiciary and the Houses of the Oireachtais,” Mr Rodgers said.
Mr Rodgers also told the court if the Houses of the Oireachtais attempted to remove the judge for stated misbehaviour under Article 34 Section 5 it would be doing so without constitutional fairness.
“The committee itself doesn’t have available to it a process for determining what evidence should be admitted,” Mr Rodgers said.
The senior counsel said that anything could be contained in the report including grossly prejudicial evidence, grossly inadmissible information and completely irrelevant material.
He said it would leave TDs at liberty to decide what they thought.
