The High Court was told yesterday of the case of a teenage boy who has twice been unable to take up bail due to inadequate resources, twice taken to a State detention centre only to be told there was no place available for him, and twice returned to a Garda station, from where he was twice freed by court order.
Dr Michael Forde SC, for the 15-year-old boy, said that the District Court judge who dealt with the boy's case had failed to take into account his circumstances when setting bail for him in relation to burglary charges. His father had abandoned his mother and the boy, his mother and seven brothers and sisters were living in a caravan in Tallaght.
Since the boy was again due before Tallaght District Court tomorrow, counsel said he feared another remand in custody which, if there was no suitable place available, would result in the boy once more being unlawfully detained in a Garda station and further High Court proceedings.
Dr Forde was applying for leave to take judicial review proceedings prohibiting District Court Judge James Paul McDonnell from imposing "unrealistic and unconstitutional" bail terms on the child - any amount in excess of £12. He said that the judge had on one occasion directed the boy to pay £50 of a £150 bail figure.
He also sought leave to seek orders prohibiting Judge McDonnell from remanding the child - or other children in similar circumstances who were not in a position to raise bail - in custody unless the judge was satisfied that there were appropriate places to detain such children and that they would not be detained overnight in a Garda station.
He further sought leave to seek damages for false imprisonment and a declaration that Section 5.1 of the Bail Act, which requires persons seeking bail to put up one-third of the designated amount, was unconstitutional, in breach of the European Convention of Human Rights and invalid at least insofar as it affected children.
Refusing leave to take judicial review proceedings, Mr Justice O Caoimh said Dr Forde was effectively seeking an order against the District Court judge on a ground that the judge would disregard the constitutional rights of the child.
He said Dr Forde had leave to indicate by noon today to the Chief State Solicitor that, should Judge McDonnell not be disposed to fix bail in a nominal sum, the boy's lawyers could apply to the High Court later for set bail on more realistic terms.
The judge said that Dr Forde could plead that Section 5.1 of the Bail Act was unconstitutional via plenary proceedings with a claim for damages.
