The former leader of the Progressive Democrats, Mr Des O'Malley, has called on the Director of Public Prosecutions to apply for a judicial review of the decision yesterday to put a temporary stay on the charges against Mr Charles Haughey of obstructing the McCracken tribunal.
In the Circuit Criminal Court Judge Kevin Haugh said that remarks made by the Tanaiste, Ms Harney, constituted an attack on Mr Haughey's character and such attacks were liable to influence potential jurors.
Following the judgment, the leader of Fine Gael, Mr John Bruton, said that Ms Harney should consider her position.
"Looking at the matter objectively, it is hard to see how the Tanaiste's position is tenable. She has a heavy political responsibility to discharge, in light of the facts, that she speaks at all times as a member of Government. Neither she nor the Government took sufficient steps to diminish the publicly-damaging effect of her original remarks in their immediate aftermath", Mr Bruton said.
The Green Party also called on Ms Harney to consider her position. Mr John Gormley TD said she had "little option but to apologise to the Irish people and resign her position as Tanaiste".
Ms Harney, who is in Poland, issued only a one-line statement, saying she had read the judgment and it would be inappropriate for her to comment. But Mr O'Malley issued a lengthier statement citing legal precedents in other cases where there was alleged prejudice. He said he was surprised by Judge Haugh's decision.
Mr O'Malley continued: "I hope the DPP will give full consideration to the possibility of applying for a judicial review of the decision. The alleged prejudice in this case seems to me, at least, to be considerably less prejudicial than in the McArthur case in 1982, when the then taoiseach said `I am glad they got the right man' when the identity of the accused was very much at issue." He pointed out that the trial of the person accused in that case had not been stopped.
The taoiseach at the time was Mr Haughey, although he was not named in Mr O'Malley's statement.
Another instance of apparently serious prejudice had occurred in the Z case, Mr O'Malley said. In that instance, the accused person had been described in very prejudicial terms by a judge in the X case, which had preceded, and was directly related to, the Z case.
"Equally, the accused in the Z case failed to have his trial stopped, even though he had been condemned publicly in the strongest possible terms. Both McArthur and Z were private individuals. The accused in this case is a former taoiseach and a well-known public figure. The right of freedom of expression of opinion in this context is one that cannot be overlooked."
The Labour Party's spokesman on finance, Mr Derek McDowell, said that the Tanaiste had shown "astonishing irresponsibility and lack of judgment" in making the comment at a time when she knew Mr Haughey's trial was pending. She would have to accept a considerable part of the responsibility for the court's decision.
Mr McDowell said that the decision seemed to underestimate the capacity of a jury to set aside potentially prejudicial matters. He hoped that the DPP would refer the decision to a higher court as soon as possible.