Dispute between McDowell and judge deepens

THE BITTER row between Justice Minister Michael McDowell and a District Court Judge intensified last night as the minister insisted he had done absolutely nothing wrong.

District Court Judge John Neilan yesterday accused Mr McDowell of directly interfering with the independence of the judicial process by commenting on the legality of remarks made by the judge in court last week.

Last week, Judge Neilan controversially threatened to lock up all convicted drink drivers for a week while he made a decision on their sentencing.

Asked to comment on the matter afterwards, Mr McDowell said such an approach would be unconstitutional and illegal.

However, in a hard-hitting attack, Judge Neilan reacted yesterday by announcing his decision not to hear any further drink driving cases for six months.

Speaking before Mullingar District Court, Judge Neilan said he was imposing the moratorium to display his “absolute belief that justice is above reproach” and to “protect the integrity and independence of the judicial system.”

“I have never suggested I would obstruct anybody from their God-given right to a fair process, or to challenge decisions made by me.

“The member of the executive in question had one simple objective in mind, to intimidate and humiliate this court,” he said.

However, a spokeswoman for Mr McDowell last night said the minister had checked the matter with the Attorney General, who had verified the legality of the matter.

“He believes it would be illegal and unconstitutional to have a general policy to jail all convicted drunk drivers for a week,” she said.

“The Attorney General confirmed this view, the comment speaks for itself. He was not interfering.”

Despite indications that Judge Neilan may be considering his resignation if the matter is not resolved to his satisfaction, Mr McDowell is not expected to comment any further and has no plans to speak directly with Judge Neilan to clarify the matter.

His spokeswoman said he had made it perfectly obvious that last week’s comments had been made in a general sense without any intention to undermine the judiciary.

But Fine Gael justice spokesman Jim O’Keeffe said it was quite unseemly that a member of the executive was in open conflict with a member of the judiciary.

“I would feel it was badly handled by Michael McDowell. He shouldn’t have allowed this to happen,” he said.

A spokesman for the Courts Service said that the President of the District Court would arrange special sittings with a different judge if a judge decided to abstain himself from hearing a case.