Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 28 Jun 1990

Vol. 125 No. 13

Adjournment Matter. - Courthouse Accommodation.

Mr. Cosgrave

I raise this matter to illustrate the fact that many courthouses are in a critical condition and there is every possibility that in some of them there could even be loss of life. In a recent report by Michael N. Slattery, Associated Chartered Fire Engineers, it was stated that hundreds of people are at risk daily be they witnesses, jurors, members of the Garda Síochana, prison officers, barristers or solicitors.

The court system is crazy. In the Dublin area we have Circuit Courts Nos. 14, 15 and 16. At 10.30 a.m. people are queueing to get in. These courts deal with serious crimes. District court appeals are heard there and if people do not succeed in their appeal they can then be put in jail. We are tolerating Victorian courthouses, converted schools and churches. Some of them are like converted cowsheds which would probably not pass for milking parlours. In the District Court family cases are heard and the rowing husband and wife or son and father have to sit beside one another. There is no consulting room. In Áras Uí Dhálaigh rooms have been reclaimed by civil servants. In sensitive family law cases, consulting rooms are necessary. It is not good enough to have to consult with them in the corridor. I ask the Minister to do something about this.

Part of the problem is that some of the officials are employed by the Department of Justice while responsibility for courthouses lies with local authorities and the Office of Public Works. Courthouses should be the responsibility of the Department of Justice. I ask the Minister to undertake an examination of courthouses and to set in train a policy of refurbishment.

In Waterford recently the county council refused to repair Kilcormack courthouse. Eventually the Office of Public Works carried out the work and then sent on the Bill to the county council. Hopefully the Minister will solve this problem and provide some decent basic facilities.

Recently in Kilmainham the justice adjourned the court because rats were seen in the court. In this day and age that is just not good enough. In other courthouses, justices have come in dressed as if they were heading for Siberia. There is a danger that members of juries will refuse to act in certain areas because of overcrowded conditions and a risk of fire.

I ask the Minister to look at the circuit and district courts in Dublin; the Dún Laoghaire courthouse is a disgrace. There are no toilet facilities and there are no consulting rooms. We must update our courthouses. Many people who attend court are not necessarily defendants. The courts deal with licensing applications, special exemption applications, auctioneers licences and so on. I do not think the majority of civil servants would tolerate what district justices, clerks, court officials, members of the Prison Service, the gardaí and other people have to put up with daily in these courts. I presume that in the Minister's own constituency the courthouses are not too modern.

District Courts Nos. 4, 5 and 6 in the Bridewell are overcrowded. People are brought there on serious offences. They try to see their barrister and they literally meet outside in the rain. The courts are a fire hazard; and there is a danger of bombs being planted there. These courthouses are death traps. I ask the Minister to give a commitment to look at the problem areas immediately and to initiate talks with the Law Society, the Bar Council and the Garda. The whole operation of the courts should be brought under one Department. Responsibility should not lie with local authorities in one area, the Office of Public Works in another, and the Department in yet another area.

I ask the Minister, when replying, to give a commitment that something will be done in these areas. You have to beat your way into Circuit Courts Nos. 14, 15 and 16. It will be less crowded in Rome next Saturday night than it is in some of these courts. The Minister should investigate the matter, set about a refurbishment programme and provide essential facilities.

I intend sharing my time with our Justice spokesman, Senator Neville.

Mr. Neville

I support Senator Cosgrave. In an earlier debate we referred to the fire hazard presented by many old buildings. There is no better example of buildings which do not conform to present day fire regulations than many of our courthouses. They are twentieth century buildings which have not been updated, which are barn like and have deteriorated over the years. There seems to be no commitment to update them. Our courts should be brought into line with modern buildings. The Civil Service is now housed in modern, centrally heated accommodation and the same should apply to the courts. Asking juries to sit, often for several days, in cold uncomfortable surroundings does not make for a relaxed approach to their duties. Juries should expect from the State the same comforts they would have in their own homes. That is the least they should expect.

It is about time we looked at the whole court system and eliminated what I would call the intimidatory trappings of our legal system. Wigs and gowns create barriers between people and I can imagine how uncomfortable it must be to give evidence in such circumstances. There have been some excellent reports on various judicial issues. In my view, it is time a commission was established to look into our courts system, buildings and accommodation, and to decide who should be responsible for them. It is crazy that several State agencies are responsible for one building. Surely this is a duplication of staff and resources. No modern business could operate in these circumstances.

"Rationalisation" is a word which is often misused but we need to rationalise the court system. We need a new approach to our judicial system and we need a commission to objectively and coldly look at the system and report to the Minister for Justice. Ultimately it should be the Minister for Justice who is responsible for all aspects of our courts' system. I congratulate Senator Cosgrave for bringing this important issue before this House.

Minister of State at the Department of the Gaeltacht (Mr. Gallagher)

I thank Senators Cosgrave and Neville for their contributions. The main problem is the poor state of courthouse accommodation and general lack of facilities in a large number of locations outside Dublin. I will deal with that first.

The Minister for Justice has already acknowledged on many occasions that the state of a large number of courthouses outside Dublin is a national disgrace. I can concur with many of the points made by the Senators and, of course, the criticisms made by them also. The fault for this lies mainly with local authorities, many of whom have been reluctant over the years to meet their statutory obligations to provide and maintain adequate courthouse accommodation. Local authorities will say that they do not have the money to meet this obligation, and bearing in mind financial restrictions in recent years there is some validity in this complaint. However, none of us can condone the conditions which pertain in many courthouses.

The Minister had this problem thoroughly reviewed and came to the conclusion that the best hope of making worthwhile progress lay in transferring to the Exchequer the financial responsibility for courthouses outside Dublin. The Government accepted a proposal from the Minister in this regard. Detailed arrangements have yet to be worked out but, in general, it is proposed to write off all outstanding balances of loans from the local loans fund in respect of court accommodation with effect from 1 January 1991 and also with effect from that date to pay directly for courthouse capital projects.

This development will have two positive results: first, the execution of urgent courthouse projects will not be delayed for lack of finance and, secondly, priorities can be better established as between projects with reference to local authority boundaries. The Minister is satisfied that the new arrangements present the opportunity to meet the courthouse accommodation problem in a planned and logical way and it would be reasonable to expect a significant improvement in a short number of years.

The proposed closure of a number of District Court venues throughout the country is not directly linked to the development on financing but, of course, it is relevant to it. The Minister has already said on a number of occasions that bearing in mind modern means of transport and communications, the need to have as many as 250 locations for District Courts throughout the country would have to be considered. Many of these are in a bad condition and, therefore, a reduction in their number would automatically free available finance for the remainder. A Departmental review is being carried out to help in determining the number of venues that might be closed and the Minister for Justice expects to be in a position to announce his decision in the relatively near future.

So far I have been talking about courthouse accommodation outside Dublin. Reference was made to the situation in Dublin by Senator Cosgrave. The responsibility for courthouse accommodation in Dublin, with a few minor exceptions, rests with the Office of Public Works. Before dealing with some current problems I should like to draw attention to the substantial improvements that have been made in the past few years in this area. The most important has been the building of Áras Ó Dalaigh beside the Four Courts. This has not only freed accommodation in the Fourt Courts proper for the development of courtrooms but in that building two family law courtrooms with ancillary facilities have been provided for the High Court and the Circuit Court. Furthermore, a new purpose built children's court has been provided in Smithfield. Plans have now been drawn up for the development of the west wing of the Four Courts and it is expected that work on this project will commence next year. It will provide a number of additional courtrooms.

There are two areas which are causing particular concern at present. The first is the deplorable condition of the District Court custody courts in Chancery Street. Restrictions on this site make it impossible to provide a full range of facilities there but, nevertheless, a plan has been approved for improvement works which should give considerable relief. Work on this project is expected to commence within a few months. The second area of concern is the Circuit Court building in Chancery Place. The Office of Public Works had a report drawn up on safety deficiencies in this building. The Bar Council privately commissioned its own report on the building and the recommendations in the two reports are broadly similar. The reports were discussed at a meeting between the Office of Public Works, the Department of Justice and the Bar Council and a plan is now being drawn up to carry out the more urgent safety works as soon as possible. The restrictions on the site and the lack of alternative courtroom accommodation generally would make it difficult to meet fully all the problems with this building.

I accept that there are some serious deficiencies in regard to court accommodation but it will be clear from what I have said that substantial progress has already been made, not only in providing many new purpose built facilities but also in paving the way for continued improvements in those areas which are in greatest need.

The question of duplication, fragmentation and rationalisation has been taken into consideration. I will bring to the attention of the Minister for Justice any of the points raised that I did not address.

The Seanad adjourned at 4.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 4 July 1990.