The Irish High Court has ruled that the State must make ‘reasonable efforts’ to assign an Irish speaking judge where requested in summary criminal trials in the District Court.
The case was taken by a Cork Councillor, Diamuid Ó Cadhla, who was charged with criminal damage to street signs named after Queen Victoria. Mr Ó Cadhla is a native Irish speaker, and sought for the District Court proceedings to be conducted in Irish. The case was adjourned when the District Court declined his request for a judge who could speak Irish. The court found that while the applicant could present his own evidence and cross examine through Irish, there was no right to full hearing in Irish through an Irish speaking judge.
The question for the High Court then became to what extent there was duty on the State under Article 8 of the Constitution to provide an Irish speaking judge in a summary criminal trial in the District Court where an accused person seeks to exercise their constitutional right to present their case in the Irish language. Article 8 states that the Irish language is the first official language in the State.
Ms Justice Una Ní Raifeartaigh in the High Court looked at the issue solely from the point of view of language rights, rather than that of due process. She identified a “peculiar and complex” relationship with the Irish language, with the Irish speaking minority sometimes facing “surprising intolerance towards its rights from quarters usually more respectful of minority rights”.
Justice Ní Raifeartaigh emphasised that the language is deemed the first language, not one of two official languages, yet there has been a lack of practical support for incorporating Irish into the administration of justice. This has required a number of cases to be taken which have upheld the need for practical implementation of the status of the Irish language as the first official language.
Ultimately, Justice Ní Raifeartaigh ruled that the State had a duty under Article 8 either to make reasonable efforts to assign a bilingual District Court or to assign such a judge as far as is reasonably practicable. She was of the view that to refuse the application for a bilingual District Judge simply because the applicant spoke English, as happened in this case, ran contrary to the spirit of Article 8. Justice Ní Raifeartaigh believed the practical effect of this would be limited as the practice has been to assign a bilingual judge in most of the small number of cases in which this has arisen.
Click here for the decision in Ó Cadhla v the Minister for Justice and Equality.