asked the Minister for Justice if he will state with reference to a person (name supplied) who has applied for a free pardon whether it will be granted; or whether, having regard to the person's persistent appeals for a sworn inquiry, he will re-open the matter so as to ensure that there has been no miscarriage of justice.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Free Pardon Application.
25.
The defendant in question was convicted in the Dublin Circuit Court in 1946 on a number of counts including robbery and housebreaking and was sentenced to three years penal servitude. He did not appeal against conviction or sentence.
It is well settled that a free pardon is granted only for the purpose of proclaiming the innocence of a person who has been wrongly convicted and that an application for the grant of a free pardon ought not to be entertained unless there is some good ground for thinking that there has been a miscarriage of justice. In my considered view, there is no such ground in this case.
I may add that applications in this particular case have been refused, in turn, by every one of my predecessors in office since the time of conviction.
The Minister is aware that this gentleman was convicted on evidence which inter alia included the evidence of a convicted criminal and that recently he applied to the Supreme Court for an extension of the time to appeal? This application was refused on the grounds that he had not brought it within a reasonable time. An explanation was given to the courts that efforts were being made by this convicted person to have the matter reopened at departmental level. Having regard to the fact that many police officers involved have now retired and that this man has persisted for over 20 years in proclaiming his innocence and in saying that he was wrongly convicted, would the Minister not think that some sort of inquiries should be conducted into the matter? It is most unusual for a person to persist in saying that he was wrongly convicted for so long a period.
I have looked into the matter in great detail and I cannot see any basis in the file for changing the decisions of my predecessors since 1946.
If any new facts are brought to the Minister's notice, will he look at the matter sympathetically.
I most certainly will.