asked the Minister for Justice if he will now consider introducing legislation which would oblige the Director of Public Prosecutions to state reasons for which he arrives at a decision to prosecute or not to prosecute in the type of case relating to a person (details supplied).
Written Answers. - DPP Decisions.
422.
Limerick East): The answer is “no” While I have no statutory or other responsibility in relation to the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, I am aware that the general refusal of the director to give, publicly, reasons for decisions not to prosecute is not based on any reluctance to be accountable for his decisions but on the fact that a policy of giving reasons would inevitably, in very many cases, mean serious damage to the reputation of individuals. The same attitude was adopted over the years by successive Attorneys General who, before the appointment of the director, discharged the functions now discharged by him.
The text of the question, however, refers to a particular "type of case". If the suggestion is that reasons should be given in and only in rare cases where there are very exceptional circumstances the position may be somewhat different. I am aware that the director is in principle prepared to consider giving reasons in such very exceptional cases if some satisfactory means can be found of defining or otherwise categorising them so that the giving of reasons in those cases and the refusal of reasons in other cases would not lead to inferences being drawn in those other cases that could be as indefensibly damaging to individuals as the general giving of reasons would be. I am informed that the question whether something could be done to isolate and identify such very exceptional cases has been under consideration but that no satisfactory means or formula has yet been found.
In the meantime, it appears to me that any issues of public interest that might have been raised by the case referred to in the question have effectively been resolved by the fact that, since the question was first put on the Order Paper, certain details of the evidence of what led up to the incident have been published in a newspaper. While it is not for me, as Minister for Justice, to defend or explain the director's decision, it seems to me that anybody who has read that newspaper report and who is familiar with what is legally required to sustain a charge of manslaughter (not to mention murder) would need no further explanation.
The question also refers to decisions to prosecute. Except in circumstances where it is later decided not to proceed — in which case the comments already made apply — a decision to prosecute is explained by the presentation of the evidence in court.