OPINION:Outcome of Michaela McAreavey trial should not mean abandoning principles of justice, writes CAROL COULTER
IT IS totally understandable that the murder on her honeymoon of Michaela McAreavey, the newly married daughter of a well-known sporting figure and a popular and beautiful young woman, should have shocked and outraged people throughout Ireland.
That shock and outrage has been compounded by a lengthy and sometimes chaotic trial, including the impugning of the character of her grief-stricken husband, which ended in the acquittal of the two men accused of her murder.
But that outrage has spilled over into the vilification of Mauritius, with calls to boycott its vital tourism industry, and into a campaign to undermine the most fundamental principles of justice, including the right to fair procedures and a fair trial.
The most egregious example of the latter was the interview of Northern Ireland Deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness, on RTÉ radio’s Morning Ireland last Thursday, in which he called repeatedly for a “retrial”. Asked about the proposed involvement of officers of the PSNI and the Garda Síochána in a reopened investigation, he said: “The first priority must be how a retrial can be brought into play. I want to hear from the Mauritians what they are doing about that.”
Later, asked again about the proposed role of PSNI and Garda investigators, he added that he wanted “a further investigation with a view to there being a retrial. That must be the main priority.” The clear implication of this and much other commentary is that the accused were guilty of the crime and that they should face trial as often as necessary until the court produces the result required by popular opinion. So the long-established principle of double jeopardy should be abandoned.
There is no doubt the inquiry into the murder was botched. Many vital witnesses were not interviewed. Forensic evidence was not adequately collected or examined. A crucial witness gave evidence after he was granted immunity from prosecution – a common ingredient in miscarriages of justice.
Evidence was given that one of the accused was mistreated by the police, who were clearly under immense pressure to produce a result and get a quick conviction, thereby reassuring the tourism industry. That attempt blew up in their faces.
Much of this should be familiar to Irish people. It is not that long ago that horrific bombings in England, killing many innocent people, produced a clamour for scapegoats, which were duly supplied by an over-eager police force. We know where that led.
In Northern Ireland, concerns that juries might not produce the required result in politically motivated trials led to the discredited non-jury Diplock courts, which relied heavily on the evidence of “supergrasses” offered immunity from prosecution. Would such courts have been justified if the victims had been young women apparently killed during attempted robberies?
Fifteen years ago, a young woman travelled to an idyllic part of Ireland seeking peace and tranquillity, only to be brutally murdered. The local gardaí botched the investigation. They did not secure the crime scene. No meaningful forensic evidence was collected. When the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) found the evidence collected was inadequate to mount a prosecution, they attempted to pressurise him to do so.
The murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier caused grief and outrage in France, and indeed in Ireland. Yet no French travel agent sought to boycott Ireland as a tourist destination.
The French authorities sought the extradition of the man the Garda had targeted as a suspect. This attempt failed ultimately in the Supreme Court, where the then chief justice said a document from the former DPP revealed “a thoroughly flawed and prejudiced Garda investigation culminating in a grossly improper attempt to achieve or even force a prosecutorial decision which accorded with that prejudice”.
One assumes the gardaí we are offering to send to Mauritius will not be those who investigated the murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier.
No criminal justice system is perfect. Miscarriages of justice do occur. Sometimes the wrong people are convicted, leaving the real perpetrators at large. Sometimes the guilty are acquitted, due to botched investigations leading to flaws in the prosecution case, or great skill on the part of the defence. In all these cases the suffering of the victims and their families is compounded and sometimes new victims are created.
But this should not lead to an abandonment of the rule of law, to a dilution of the right to a fair trial or to an abandonment of fair procedures and basic principles of justice. Let there be a continued inquiry into the murder of Michaela McAreavey. If the government of Mauritius truly feels it needs help with this – and not just because it is bullied by Irish politicians – then investigators from other jurisdictions with the necessary skills and experience should be prepared to provide them.
But those on whom suspicion has fallen are entitled to be presumed innocent until they are tried and convicted, and the Mauritian courts are entitled to conduct their trials as they see fit.
Carol Coulter is Legal Affairs Editor