Deputy David Molony has been given permission to raise on the Adjournment the case of Brendan Flynn, an Irish national at present in a Spanish prison on hunger strike. The Deputy has 20 minutes.
Adjournment Debate. - Irish National in Spanish Prison.
I am particularly grateful to you, Sir, for the opportunity to raise the case of Brendan Flynn here this afternoon. I want to thank the Minister of State for making himself available for this question.
I do not suppose any person can be in as lonely a position as to be in some sort of trouble in a foreign country, to be in prison, away from one's family, from people one knows and trusts and finding oneself in a state of complete and utter uncertainty, and the only thing that is certain is the possibility that one might be detained for up to four years in prison before either being released or having one's case tried.
I became interested in this matter in the past few days because I heard a journalist being interviewed about it on radio. When I looked into it I was surprised to see that the matter had been highlighted in different respects over the past several months. I have to say that I think Brendan Flynn is fortunate in that he has at least one friend of a very genuine nature in this country, that is journalist Sam Smith, who has pursued the case relentlessly and who has been largely responsible for all the publicity this case has generated here particularly recently.
Brendan Flynn is an Irish national, in his forties, from Dublin. On his own admission I understand he is a former member of the Fianna Fáil Party. I gather that he was involved in property dealing in Dublin. In 1981 he became interested in investing in a time-sharing apartment complex in Lanzarote in Spain and invested a substantial amount of money in it. Having established this complex he had the difficulty of managing and looking after it. But he met with one, Yves Dorval, who was a property consultant or manager in Lanzarote. For his own bad luck Flynn got involved with this man. Over a period of time they interacted as partners together in this business. It became apparent after some time that Mr. Dorval was pocketing more than his share of the profits of the business. In March 1984, when the situation had become intolerable, Brendan Flynn confronted the problem, met with Dorval, but failed to solve the problem. He then instituted civil legal proceedings in Spain. Some time later he returned home and was in Dublin on 2 July 1984 when Mr. Dorval's body was found and it was evident that he had been strangled.
I do not want to get involved in the minutiae of the evidence that is there or not there about how this man was killed. I just want to put on the record of the House that the evidence there is extremely doubtful in many respects. Theories have been built on very insubstantial investigations. There are two police forces in Spain. I can only say, to my astonishment, that among themselves they differ very substantially as to what happened or how this man could have been killed and indeed as to who killed him. But which or whether, when Brendan Flynn was in Dublin and heard about the death of his former business partner he flew out to Spain on, I think, 18 August 1984. He went to Lanzarote and on 20 August 1984 he was arrested there by one of the police forces, the Policia Nacional. They brought him back to Plaza del Ingles and interviewed him. I understand they gave him an opportunity to answer some questions that related to the murder of Mr. Dorval, that the answers he gave them were not regarded as satisfactory and, as a result of this, he was brutally treated.
I understand he has given particular details of the way he was treated to the Minister for Foreign Affairs by way of letter that was somehow transmitted. I am not going to go into the details of the way in which he was treated. It is there on record, it has been published in magazines and in papers and I understand the information is available to the Minister. I would urge anybody interested in the case to take a look at his description of how he was ill-treated by the police. The fact that he was ill-treated can be substantiated by independent evidence. The police force who found Dorval's body, the Guardia Civil — because they found the body — should have had responsibility for conducting the investigation into the case. When Flynn was arrested by the other police force in Spain, in the ordinary course, he should have been handed over to the Guardia Civil but that did not happen. When the Guardia Civil did seek to get Flynn back into their custody the first police force made a curious application to court to ensure that they would be allowed continue their investigation into the case. Apparently their application was refused and the Guardia Civil were astonished, when they eventually got custody of Flynn, because of his condition. It was evident that he had been badly beaten. I might say that I understand he is still suffering from severe physical injuries as a result of the treatment and, no doubt, considerable mental anguish from the treatment he received. But the second police force were so concerned at his condition that, before they would take any responsibility for him, they had him examined by a medical doctor who apparently certified to the Guardia Civil's satisfaction that they were not in any way responsible and that he was in that condition when he was given into their hands.
I say that because the House will be well aware that in this country allegations can be made from time to time that people are mistreated or brutally treated at the hands of the Garda, police force or whatever. In this case I would suggest to the Minister of State present that there is independent evidence that establishes beyond question that, at someone's hands, while in the custody of the Spanish authorities, Flynn was mistreated. However, he is not now in the custody of the police. He is in the custody of the prison authorities in Spain and he has been there since August last.
The question of evidence against him presents somewhat of a problem because there is not a great deal of it. Unquestionably Flynn had motive — there is no doubt in the world about that. He is not charged with actually committing the murder. He could not be charged with that because he was in Dublin when the murder occurred but he is charged with financing and arranging it — I should imagine a pretty difficult thing to prove under any code of law. There is no evidence because under the Spanish system — I have the benefit of seeing this and of speaking to Flynn's lawyer in Spain — the court must receive from the prosecution a statement outlining the evidence they have. This document is full of suggestions as to the motive Flynn might have had. Obviously, given the history of the case, there are loads of reasons to show that Flynn had motive but there is no solid evidence to associate Flynn in any way with the murder of Dorval.
One magazine published in Ireland today lists 16 Irish people who, between them, were ripped off to the tune of £750,000 by the deceased Mr. Dorval, any or all of whom had the same motive, namely, that this man Dorval fiddled money from them. Other than that motive, there is simply no evidence available. Flynn made a statement to the Spanish authorities under duress, having gone through the appalling treatment that he evidently went through. In that statement he did not in any sense admit guilt. While under the greatest pressure imaginable, he maintained his innocence and, to this day, stoutly maintains his innocence. I cannot say if he is guilty but from the documents I have seen — and I have seen as much as can be seen — and from the evidence available — there is no evidence which could possibly convict him and this is why he has gone on hunger strike. He has been on hunger strike now for 15 days, has lost an awful lot of weight and is suffering mentally and physically from the conditions in which he finds himself.
Flynn's biggest problem is that under Spanish law he can be held without trial for up to four years. It is extraordinary that any country could have such a law. I made inquiries to see if any other country had such laws and I cannot trace any. The continental system differs from ours — we had a lot of discussion on this during the Criminal Justice Bill — and they can hold people for a lot longer than we do, but four years is stunning. This is not a throwback to a law of decades ago; it was introduced a few years ago. At that time the limitation was two and a half years but I understand it was increased to four years because of the problems the Spanish authorities had with the Basque Separatists and this was a way of controlling terrorism.
There is no evidence of any worth or value against Flynn and that situation has not changed since 20 August last when he was arrested. He is faced with the bleak prospect of remaining in the hands of the Spanish authorities in prison for up to four years. If an Irish national is mistreated by the authorities of any country, it is incumbent on the Government to make the strongest representations and objections. I am sure that the Minister for Foreign Affairs has already made representations in this regard, but when someone is held indefinitely without evidence or a trial it calls for something outstanding in terms of effort. Thousands of Irish people travel to Spain every year on holidays and they should know how they could be treated if they were arrested.
I am not convinced that Brendan Flynn is guilty but, even if he is, it is completely intolerable that an Irish national should be treated in this way. Under our system if a person was held for that length of time without evidence, the case would be thrown out. When the Garda cannot produce a book of evidence after a few months — it obviously varies from case to case — the person to whom the case relates will be released. If he is not, there is an application for habeas corpus to the High Court and undoubtedly that court would release him. This man cannot do anything about his position and the only certainty he has is that he might have to remain there for four years from the time of his arrest before his case is dealt with. Irish people going to Spain should be aware of the facts in this regard because anyone could be arrested for an offence. Mr. Flynn has been very badly treated by the Spanish authorities and we should acquaint holidaymakers going to Spain of that fact.
If the Spanish authorities will not take seriously the representations made by the Irish Government and will not respond quickly, we should convince Irish people that they should not go to Spain. The Spanish know the value of foreign tourists and should treat them properly. Mr. Flynn was certainly guilty of keeping bad company — I am not referring to his former association with Fianna Fáil — but to the fact that he was obviously associating with Dorval who was, to say the least, an unsavoury character. By any standards, however, his human rights are being disregarded and that must stop.
I will be following up this case in an other respect, even if Mr. Flynn is released tomorrow. I do not believe that Spain's accession to the European Community should go through until their laws are changed. I accept they are a democracy now, but it is not so long since they were a dictatorship. Perhaps at times we pay lip service to human rights, but we must ensure that laws like that are excised from the statute book of Spain before they are admitted to the Community.
I am sure that the Minister of State made representations about this case but something more must be done to show our complete dissatisfaction at the way in which Brendan Flynn was treated. If the Spanish authorities do not react, we should bring this matter further. They should try Flynn or release him.
I fully appreciate the concern expressed by Deputy Molony, which is shared by the Government. We fully understand the lonely position of one of our nationals who is lodged in jail in another country. I assure Deputy Molony and the House that everything possible is being done by the Government in regard to Mr. Flynn's situation.
The Irish Consul visited Mr. Flynn shortly after his arrest and numerous times since. An official of the Irish Embassy in Madrid also visited him, as late as last week. The embassy have been in regular contact with Mr. Flynn's lawyers in Spain. In principle, this is a matter for the courts in Spain in which it is not possible to intervene. We cannot interfere with judicial proceedings in another country. Nevertheless, the embassy in Madrid made representations to the Spanish Foreign Ministry and has spoken to the police and the judicial authorities concerned. We obtained a certificate of good conduct from the Garda in relation to Mr. Flynn which we passed on to the Spanish authorities.
It would not be helpful to Mr. Flynn to divulge the nature of the concern or the manner in which we expressed it but I assure the House that we are doing everything possible to speed up the reasolution of this case. We are concerned about the possibility of certain prejudicial information which may have been given to the Spanish police about Mr. Flynn. Deputy Molony made certain references to maltreatment of Mr. Flynn. As I mentioned, our officials in Spain have been in close contact with Mr. Flynn's lawyers. In the light of our discussions with them. I am concerned that anything we say in regard to such allegations might be prejudicial to Mr. Flynn. I say that while giving due weight to the concern very properly expressed by Deputy Molony and bearing in mind that our main preoccupation at present is to ensure a swift and speedy resolution of the case on the basis, we hope, of Mr. Flynn's protestation of total innocence. We are very concerned with the possibility that Mr. Flynn could be detained indefinitely. Following a visit from one of our officials from the embassy to the Canary Islands last week, further representations have been made by our embassy in Madrid. Our latest information is that Mr. Flynn's case will receive priority treatment and that we may expect it to be referred to the High Court next month. I hesitate to say anything further at this stage because of a genuine concern that anything I might say could be prejudicial to Mr. Flynn in his present situation. But I wish to assure the House that from the very beginning, from the moment the matter was brought to our attention, we gave the case full attention, both by way of a visit from our consul and of visits by officials from our embassy in Madrid and these visits were followed by the continuing representations I have outlined. I hope that as a result of the action that has been taken there will be a resolution of the problem in the near future and that this will lead to Mr. Flynn's early release.
I should clarify the reference to the possible prejudicial effect on Mr. Flynn of statements made by me in this House. I would refer to discussions my officials have had with Mr. Flynn's lawyer. Our view is that we must take considerable note of the advice of the lawyer as to the tactics and strategy he intends adopting in the conduct of the case. On that basis, I do not wish to say anything that would interfere in any way with the strategy of Mr. Flynn's lawyer.
On a point of information, is the Minister aware that Mr. Flynn was interviewed, that the interview was broadcast on radio the other morning and that in that interview he described how he was treated by the police authorities?
I can only say that extensive discussions have taken place between my officials and his lawyers. In that situation I must take into account very seriously the views expressed by the lawyers. I could not do anything worse than to say something that would prejudice Mr. Flynn and his lawyers in their presentation of the case.
The situation then is that keeping in touch with Mr. Flynn and his lawyers and having made the strongest possible representations to the authorities in Spain, we are hopeful of an early resolution of this case followed by the early release of Mr. Flynn on the basis of his protestation of innocence being upheld by the Spanish judicial authorities.
The Dáil adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 20 March 1985.