Criminal sentencing - Time for TDs to stay away from courts
Few topics arouse greater public concern than the unacceptable spectacle of politicians engaging in special pleading for criminals. While a person charged with offences is entitled to call in character evidence for consideration by the court, politicians should only become involved in exceptional cases, if at all.
Controversy erupted earlier this year when it emerged that Labour TD Kathleen Lynch had written to a judge in a rape case, saying the perpetrator came of a decent family. His parents had asked her to write the letter for the court, hoping it might have a bearing on the case.
Not only did the judge disregard Ms Lynch’s deplorable overture, he rightly put the contents of her letter into the public domain. Predictably, the Cork TD’s intervention was seen by one of the rapist’s victims as a plea for mitigation of sentence for sexual offences.
In a forthright verdict, the judge handed down a 14-year sentence on eight counts of rape. Caught in the glare of publicity, Ms Lynch admitted she had acted inappropriately and apologised for the distress caused.
In the aftermath of this outrage, two rape victims wrote to all party leaders demanding new rules on the practice of TDs writing to judges on behalf of constituents. However, despite beating their collective breasts at the time, they have failed to reach any agreement about such a code of practice.
This issue goes to the heart of Ireland’s political system, a well-oiled machine used by generations of public representatives to solicit votes through favours, nods and winks, or letters to officials on a broad range of topics. It is called “clientelism”.
The reluctance of politicians to restrict the practice was evidenced five years ago when a similar code of conduct was called for after former PD junior minister, Bobby Molloy, made representations to a judge in a Galway rape case. Having accepted that he had made improper representations on behalf of a constituent whose relative was charged with serious sexual offences, Mr Molloy stepped down. But no guidelines were set.
Last year, Tony Killeen, another minister of state, caused a furore by writing letters seeking early or temporary release of 10 prisoners, including a murderer.
Nobody contests the right of TDs to represent constituents in the course of their normal day-to-day business. But politicians are entering a dangerous minefield when they are perceived as seeking to influence the courts, particularly in criminal cases.
There is an onus on the political parties to set clear limits to this controversial practice. In the interests of accountability and transparency, they must also explain the failure to reach agreement on the proposal from Environment Minister John Gormley for cross-party guidelines on representations.
There are compelling reasons for drawing a clear line in the sand and, once and for all, outlawing the unconscionable practice of making political representations in criminal cases.
