Justice minister doubles down on claim solicitors' strike 'deliberately affecting' rape cases

Justice minister Jim O'Callaghan: 'I can’t just give in. I'm not going to give in to the demands of the solicitors.'

Justice minister Jim O’Callaghan has insisted that he is “not going to give in to the demands of the solicitors” as he doubled down on suggestions that the solicitors’ strike is “deliberately affecting” rape cases.

While the minister conceded that the only new cases at Monday’s sitting of the Dublin District Court, sitting at the Central Criminal Court, were rape cases, he questioned why no continuing cases were disrupted.

Criminal solicitors across the country are continuing to strike following the introduction of a flat fee of €520 for free legal aid certificates. The old system offered a €240 fee followed by €60 for each subsequent court appearance.

In his opening statement to the Oireachtas Justice Committee, Mr O’Callaghan noted that most cases not proceeding in the Dublin District Court because of the strikes are rape charges, as he suggested they are being “deliberately affected”.

Fine Gael TD Barry Ward, a coalition colleague, called on Mr O’Callaghan to withdraw his remarks, branding them “grossly unfair”.

“Every trial in the Central Criminal Court [on Monday] was a rape trial, so there's no evidence to suggest that solicitors were deliberately targeting that,” Mr Ward said.

In response, Mr O’Callaghan noted that seven cases continued in the court on Monday that were not rape cases.

He also argued that “the only cases that have been affected in the Central Criminal Court on the 5th, on the 12th, and the 19th [of October] were cases involving allegations of rape”.

Sinn Féin TD Mark Ward said other non-rape cases proceeded in courts on Monday, and that the minister had “cherry-picked one court and had a look at one court because it suits your political agenda at the moment”.

Mr O’Callaghan said he had focused on Dublin since when the “campaign from the weekend was on, Central Criminal Court cases were going to be affected”.

Shortly before the committee meeting, Mr O’Callaghan wrote to Rosemarie Loftus, president of the Law Society, saying he had “instructed [his] officials to organise a meeting in the coming days to hear [its] viewpoint and specific concerns”.

However, at the committee, he warned that he will not “capitulate”. “I think people are confusing failing to engage with agreeing with what they want,” Mr O’Callaghan said.

I can’t just give in. I'm not going to give in to the demands of the solicitors.

During Leaders’ Questions, the Social Democrats’ Cian O’Callaghan raised concerns about victims being cross-examined by the alleged perpetrators of the crimes.

“Last month, a man who was alleged to have threatened to rape and kill his former partner was allowed to cross-examine her in court,” he said.

“This is a man who was accused of trying to kick in her front door and break into her home while young children were present. He is accused of sending her an image of a handgun and saying he would rip her teeth out with pliers and stick a gun down her throat.

“He was allowed to cross-examine this terrified woman because no solicitor was available to represent him.”

In response, the Taoiseach said that “solicitors should attend those cases”. “The dispute, and the nature of it, does not justify the absence from such cases,” he added.

This was echoed by Mr O’Callaghan at the committee, who said he would “compare it to the intensive care doctor or the intensive care nurse”. “They don't withdraw their services,” he added.

• Louise Burne, political correspondent