I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Séamus Brennan, and his officials. The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the Supplementary Estimate for Vote 14 - Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions which falls within the remit of the Department of the Taoiseach. A proposed timetable has been circulated for the meeting which will allow for opening statements by the Minister of State and Opposition spokespersons followed by an open discussion and a vote. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Estimates for Public Services, 1999.
Vote 14 - Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Supplementary).
I thank the Chairman for his kind welcome. I am here to request that the committee approve a Supplementary Estimate of £1.73 million for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The office has requested this amount for the payment of fees to counsel who were retained by the State to conduct criminal prosecutions. An amount of £6.222 million was originally voted for the purposes in the current year, 1999. The overrun in fees under the counsels subhead arises from two principal causes, namely, the incidence of a large number of exceptionally expensive cases and a somewhat higher than expected increase in the level of ordinary cases before the Circuit Courts and the Special Criminal Court.
The vast majority of cases dealt with by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions results either in the defendant pleading guilty on the day of the trial or a trial of two or three days duration. Some trials might run as long as a week. The cost of such trials will generally not exceed £3,000 in the Circuit Court or £25,000 in the Special Criminal Court. Most cases do not approach these levels of fees in any event. There are, however, a small number of complex or high profile cases in any given year which may last for several weeks and where the total cost could run into hundreds of thousands of pounds. To cover such cases the submissions that supported the office's Estimate for 1999 included a provision of £450,000 to cover cases costing more than £40,000. This provision was in line with the office's experience in previous years. However, it has proved to be inadequate for the current year. So far in 1999 the office has had 12 particularly expensive cases with total costs of £1.35 million. These included the Veronica Guerin and the Detective Garda McCabe murder cases. Further expensive cases are expected before year end. The incidence of these expensive cases is the principal reason why the Supplementary Estimate is necessary.
The second and lesser cause of the unusually high level of fees being paid in 1999 is an increase in the number of cases being brought before the courts. Over the past several years the office has experienced a steady increase in the number of cases being heard before the Circuit Court and the higher courts. Currently, the growth in the number of cases in the Circuit Court and higher courts requiring payment by the office appears to be in the region of 12 per cent. The number of cases heard in any year in the Circuit Court, where most of our cases occur, is determined to some extent by the attitude of the District Court, which is entitled to refuse to try cases that it thinks are far too serious, and by the speed at which the Circuit Court and other indictable courts can arrange to hear cases. These factors are outside the control of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Finally with regard to future years, the increase in the general level of activity will have a continuing impact on the annual cost of fees paid to prosecution counsel. Moneys will be sought to meet this in the normal manner. The incidence of exceptionally expensive cases is not expected to continue on a year on year basis. It is likely that there will be years where an abnormal incidence of such cases will occur and in those cases Supplementary Estimates may be required.
I apologise for the absence our party spokesperson, Deputy Noonan, who is in the Dáil. Will the Minister of State outline the number of cases referred to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the percentage of that number taken to court? Is there a limit to the fees paid? What are the guidelines on fees? Are fees ever referred to the Taxing Master, for example? The Minister of State mentioned high profile cases, particularly the Veronica Guerin and Detective Garda McCabe trials. Will he name the other ten expensive cases?
Information concerning the number of cases taken by the DPP, in so far as he gives it out, is contained in the annual report of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions which was published some months ago. The Deputy will recall that up to then the DPP did not produce an annual report. The annual report gives some figures regarding the level of prosecutions taken. I do not have a percentage figure to hand.
I mentioned two high profile cases, namely, the Veronica Guerin and Detective Garda McCabe murder trials. These were two of the 12 particularly expensive cases which in total cost £1.35 million. The defendants in the other cases are Desmond Flynn and Peter Keeley, otherwise known as the Aer Lingus holidays case. Then there is the Scott Delaney and Joseph Delaney murder case; the Michael O'Brien murder case and the Patrick Joseph McGreene murder case. The Aer Lingus holidays case lasted 34 days, the Delaney case lasted 27 days, the O'Brien case lasted 34 days and the McGreene case lasted 24 days. I am using defendants' names here. The murder case in which Andrew Brennan, Patrick Brennan and William O'Neill were defendants ran for 24 days. An armed robbery offence case - defendants Jeff Fay, Thomas Hackett and John Freeman - ran for eight days. A murder case in which Paul Fitzgerald was the defendant ran for 15 days. Some of these defendants were acquitted and some were convicted. The murder case in which David Patrick Murphy was the defendant ran for 13 days. I emphasise that some of these cases resulted in acquittals while others resulted in convictions.
What controls or guidelines are in place in the level of fees paid to prosecution counsel?
The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions pays fees in accordance with an established scale.
A sum of £1.35 million was outlined in two cases. How much of that comprised fees to legal counsel?
I understand the £1.35 million figure relates to 12 cases. I mentioned the Guerin and McCabe cases which are among the more well known and I read most of the other cases into the record in reply to Deputy Deenihan. Approximately 60 per cent of the £1.35 million was paid to senior counsel and 40 per cent to junior counsel.
Are fees agreed before cases go to court?
Yes.
Thank you.
During the course of the year, the Director of Public Prosecutions issued a report on the activities of his office for the first time ever. As we are approving this Supplementary Estimate, I urge the Minister of State to use his good offices to ensure that the report will be produced on an annual basis and that its main recommendations will be acted upon. The office of the Director of Public Prosecutions has been in operation for more than 20 years. The DPP indicated in the report that on an annual basis 22 per cent of cases submitted by the Garda for prosecution were returned due to lack of evidence. I hope that after so many years in operation, the office has outlined clear procedures for the Garda Commissioner on the level of evidence required. It is not acceptable that 22 per cent of cases must be returned to the Garda on an annual basis due to lack of evidence. The Garda should have clear guidelines in this regard in order that the DPP can proceed with prosecutions. Perhaps the Garda do not have any further evidence available to them in those cases. The report was a very good one and I look forward to its recommendations being acted upon.
We will certainly ask the DPP to consider the Deputy's comments, particularly the latter ones. The report represents a great breakthrough. It had been suggested for many years that the office should produce an annual report and the first one, which contained a wealth of statistics and recommendations, was very good. I confirm that the report will be produced on an annual basis hereafter. Although we are not really considering the report today, it will form the basis of debate on the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Certain reorganisations are being considered in connection with the office and the Nally report.
Concern has been expressed in the past in regard to the staffing levels, particularly the senior staffing level, in the office when delays were experienced in prosecutions. Will the Minister outline the improvements which have occurred in staffing levels in the past yearto ensure that undue delays will not be experienced?
It may not be too late to wish the new Director of Public Prosecutions every success in his role. Like everyone who works in that office, which is a tough assignment, he will need it. There are 15 legal officers apart from the DPP himself. Members of staff in the office are not comfortable with that staffing level and have highlighted the need for additional officers. That is currently being considered.
Does the current staffing level of 15 officers represent much of an increase over last year's staffing level?
The staffing level has remained relatively stable in recent years.
What is the procedure for selecting barristers in these cases? Are they chosen from a panel?
The DPP makes appointments on his own authority, following consultation with senior members of the profession.
It is not easy to predict the level of cases which will arise and I appreciate Members' understanding of this issue.