Gangland-crime accused challenges refusal to grant legal aid

A man facing charges under new anti-gang legislation has secured the permission of the High Court to challenge a District Court judge's refusal to grant him legal aid.

Eddie O'Loughlin, who denies the charge of directing the activities of a criminal organisation contrary to Section 5 of the Criminal Justice Act 2009 in Galway between February and June 2010, claims that Judge Geoffrey Browne did not conduct a proper inquiry into his (O'Loughlin's) means which he ought to have done before refusing to grant him legal aid.

Today at the High Court Mr O'Loughlin of Rockfield Park, Rahoon Galway secured leave to bring judicial review proceedings aimed at quashing District Judge Geoffrey Browne refusal, at Harristown District Court on June 11 last, to grant Mr O'Loughlin legal aid.

In his proceedings Mr O'Loughlin is seeking a number of declarations including that the failure to conduct an inquiry into his means is a breach of fair procedures and contrary to his constitutional rights and rights under the European Convention.

He is also seeking an order to have his application for legal aid re-heard by another judge. Leave was granted, following an ex-parte application, by Mr Justice Michael Peart, who made the matter returnable before the High Court early next month.

Moving the application Martin Giblin SC for Mr O'Loughlin said that in his application for legal aid his client furnished a statement of means to the court.

Counsel said the statement showed that Mr O'Loughlin is on social welfare of €196 per week, living with his partner and supporting two children, and that he had an interest in a site in Bulgaria worth €9000.

However counsel said that the judge after hearing evidence from the garda that Mr O'Loughlin's lifestyle did not suit a person who was on social welfare, following the States objection to granting Mr O'Loughlin legal aid, refused the application.

The court was told that Mr O'Loughlin had recently purchased a 2005 registered car for €5,000 cash and recently returned from a trip abroad. Counsel argued that there was not "a scintilla" of evidence put before the court which backed up the state's claim.

Counsel also told the court that the the case against his client was brought under recently introduced legislation and could last for a few months.