Sinn Féin willing to support renewal of Special Criminal Court if commitment given on reforms

Sinn Féin has said it would be willing to support the year-long extension of the Special Criminal Court at the end of this month if the Government gave a firm commitment to implement significant reforms recommended by an expert group.

The party’s justice spokesman, Pa Daly, has described as “a game changer” the recommendations of the Government-appointed group chaired by retired Court of Appeal judge, Mr Justice Michael Peart.

The group has recommended the abolition of the Offences Against the State Acts, the antiterrorist legislation in place for more than 80 years.

However, the majority of the group came to the view that the controversial non-jury Special Criminal Court be retained, but only after substantial reforms have been put in place including establishing it on a permanent (rather than emergency) basis. Two of the six-member group dissented and argued that the court should be abolished in its entirety.

Offences Against the State Act: Is it still needed?

---

Sinn Féin willing to support renewal of Special Criminal Court if commitment given on reforms

---

Review calls for abolition of emergency legislation used to combat IRA

---

Minority report calling for abolition of Special Criminal Court to be published

---

Mr Daly told The Irish Times on Wednesday that Sinn Féin would support the legislative changes that would come about if the majority of the report was adopted by the Government and a reformed non-jury court continued in existence.

“The suggested safeguards for the non-jury court are on the stronger end of the scale, and I think the group should be commended for that. And certainly with all those safeguards in place, I think that we’d be in a position to support any new court that is there,” he said.

A motion to renew for another year the emergency legislation giving the Special Criminal Court its remit will come before the Dáil before the end of the month. Mr Daly said Sinn Féin would be prepared to back it if the Government agreed to an amendment that would commit it to early implementation of the Peart Group recommendations.

He indicated that early might be taken as new legislation for the non-jury court being ready within 12 months. A review in 2002 by former Supreme Court judge Anthony Hederman also recommended abolition of the Offence Against the State Acts but this was never acted upon.

“We don’t want to be back here in 12 months [renewing the legislation],” said Mr Daly. “It is 20 years since the Hederman Group published its recommendations and nothing has been done about that.

“Those days are gone. I think the Government has to do something to show a firm commitment to changing the legislation. And then we may be in a position to support [the renewal].”

However, it is unlikely the Government will be minded to agree to the Sinn Féin amendment. Ms McEntee is expected to argue for a continuation of the status quo notwithstanding the report’s recommendations.

In her initial response to the review, Ms McEntee adopted a cautious approach to the next steps, saying no change would be contemplated until a detailed consideration of the review was carried out.

“It is absolutely vital that we continue to annually renew the relevant provisions of the Offences Against the State Acts pending these detailed considerations, and I look forward to bringing motions before the Houses in this regard next week,” she said.

Mr Daly said his party welcomed the recommendations to end emergency legislation, abolish the Offences Against the State Act and set up a non-jury court on a permanent basis, using a modern legal framework.

“If non-jury trials remain necessary in exceptional circumstances, it would only be after safeguards have been put in place,” he said.

“Every case will be dealt with on an individual basis. The DPP will have to indicate that it’s to be dealt with in the non-jury court. The Garda Commissioner will have to act similarly. Gardaí will need to certify that safeguards for jurors have been looked into already. So that’s fairly tight and it’s going to limit any case that goes to a future non-jury court to exceptional circumstances.”