Curtin fails in attempt to halt Oireachtas probe

JUDGE Brian Curtin yesterday failed in his attempt to prevent the Oireachtas investigating how child pornography was found on his personal computer.

The High Court yesterday rejected Judge Curtin’s challenge to the committee which was set up by the Oireachtas to gather evidence into his alleged misbehaviour.

Unless the Kerry-based circuit court judge appeals the decision, it means the way is now clear for the committee to continue its investigation, which had been put on hold pending yesterday’s outcome.

The committee will have the power to order Judge Curtin to produce his computer and its hard drive, which are currently in the hands of the gardaí.

It can also order him to appear before it and produce documents.

Judge Curtin was not in court yesterday to hear Mr Justice Thomas Smyth’s 216-page reserved judgment, which took more than four-and-a-half hours to read out.

Judge Curtin’s lawyers would not say immediately after yesterday’s decision whether they would appeal. The case has been put back until next Wednesday.

The Oireachtas committee, chaired by Fianna Fáil TD Denis O’Donovan, was set up in June of last year following Judge Curtin’s acquittal on a charge of possessing child pornography two months earlier.

The acquittal came when it emerged that the warrant under which his computer was seized was out of date.

The task of the committee was to collect evidence and present it to both Houses so they could consider a motion calling for the judge’s removal from office under Article 35.4 of the Constitution.

Yesterday, Mr Justice Smyth said he was satisfied that the Article 35.4 motion, the amendment of standing orders in both Houses, and the amending legislation put in place to deal with the situation were within the terms of the Constitution.

He said he was also satisfied the committee, which is tasked with collecting evidence only and will not make findings of fact, had acted within its power.

Judge Curtin is taking a separate action against the Garda for damages for trespass resulting from the seizure of his computer.

However, Mr Justice Smyth said he was satisfied that the computer and the material contained on it would be admissible as evidence to the committee.

He also ruled that the issue of double jeopardy did not apply. “Even if it does, it takes second place to the need for public confidence in the judiciary.”

There was no question of any criminal trial following on the investigation of the committee, he said. He added committee evidence would not be admissible in criminal proceedings.