Vol. 437 No. 6
252 Mr. Byrne asked the Minister for Justice if the recent proceedings and result of the first marital rape case in the history of the State highlight the necessity of instituting some procedure for reviewing and/or appealing the decisions of the Director of Public Prosecutions; the plans, if any, she has in this regard; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
I am not clear as to what type of appeal or review mechanism the Deputy has in mind nor am I clear as to what purpose would be served by introducing such a mechanism.
It may be that what the Deputy has in mind is that the Director's decision to prosecute should be appealable to the Court. (An appeal to any other person or body would trammel the Director's discretion and independence and thereby run contrary to the fundamental purpose of the Prosecution of Offences Act, 1974).
If provision were made for any such appeal to the Court, it would, in effect, result in the same evidence being presented twice to the Court — first to determine the reasonableness or otherwise of the Director's decision to prosecute and, second (assuming that the Director's decision was deemed reasonable by the Court), to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused. This would not only be wrong in principle (and, quite possibly unconstitutional), but would serve no useful purpose since the Courts, as things stand, will, in any event, determine guilt or innocence at the end of the day.
Equally valid objections could be made to the introduction of an appeals or review mechanism to deal with cases where the Director decides that there should be no prosecution.
I have no proposals to amend the law in this regard.
