Silent office is no stranger to controversy

SINCE it was established in 1974, the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has been embroiled in many controversies, mainly when a decision is taken not to prosecute or when the prosecution goes wrong, as it did in yesterday’s Curtin case.

The independence of the DPP’s office was expressly stipulated in the Act and has been jealously guarded by the two holders of the office, Eamonn Barnes (who held the position for 25 years) and James Hamilton, who succeeded him in September 1999.

During his tenure, Mr Barnes had an unwavering policy of never giving reasons for his decisions, a policy that has attracted a lot of bitter criticism over the years. The most stand-out case was that of Malcolm MacArthur, the man convicted of the murder of a young nurse Bridie Gargan in 1980.

MacArthur was also charged with the murder of a farmer, Donal Dunne.

But the DPP entered a nolle prosqui (a statement that the DPP will proceed no further with the suit).

That sparked a furore, to which Mr Barnes responded with a statement that defended his policy of giving no reasons.

“There is a coercive reason for it. If reasons are given in one or more cases, they must be given in all. Otherwise wrong conclusions will inevitably be drawn in relation to those cases where the reasons are refused, resulting in unjust implications regarding the guilt of the suspect...

“If, on the other hand, reasons are given in all cases and those reasons are more than bland generalities, the unjust consequences are even more obvious and likely,” he stated.

In the late 1990s, Positive Action, representing hundreds of women infected with hepatitis C, reacted furiously when the DPP decided not to pursue any criminal case arising out of the Tribunal Report of the Blood Tribunal.

The DPP decided it was not possible to pursue a case under the criminal law “as it stands at the moment”.

The policy of a blanket silence was maintained until Mr Hamilton took over in 1999. Soon after his appointment, the DPP decided that he would not pursue a fresh trial against Nora Wall, the former nun who had been wrongly accused of a sexual offence, and another man.

For the first time since his office was set up, Mr Hamilton consented to the publication of his explanation for not pursuing the prosecution.

He also outlined the various actions taken by his office during the case.

While it was a departure from Mr Barnes’ policy, Mr Hamilton maintains a policy of not commenting on individual cases unless the circumstances warrant it. He may yet decide to issue a statement on the Curtin case, in the light of Judge Moran excoriating criticisms on the manner in which the case was prosecuted.

There have been a number of other contentious decisions. In 2000, he decided not to charge the man who admitted to murdering two former patients of a psychiatric hospital in Grangegorman in 1997. The man, Mark Nash, subsequently withdrew the admission he had made. A sister of one of the victims criticised the DPP’s handling of the case.