Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 2 May 2017
130. Deputy Denise Mitchell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality if the assessment of evidence has begun by an independent person in respect of the recent Dáil Éireann motion on the Stardust tragedy of 1981; if there is a timeframe as to when this will conclude; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [19518/17]
Amharc ar fhreagra159. Deputy Denise Mitchell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality the status of the review of evidence in the case of the Stardust tragedy; when a report on the matter is expected; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [19996/17]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 130 and 159 together.
The Deputy will be aware that the Government agreed to appoint Judge McCartan to assess any new and updated evidence uncovered by the Stardust Relatives and Victims Committee in order to recommend whether a Commission of Investigation should be established into the Stardust Tragedy of 1981. Judge McCartan was appointed on 7 March 2017 and officially commenced his new role on 27 March. The assessment process will be conducted completely independently of Government, and it is hoped that Judge McCartan can conclude his assessment process within 90 days. The scope of the assessment process is outlined in the Dáil Motion of 26 January 2017.
Judge McCartan will be assisted by a Junior Counsel. He will have discretion to afford the Stardust Relatives and Victims Committee whatever representation he believes is necessary in order for the Committee to present its evidence to the assessment process.
To facilitate the assessment process, office accommodation and meeting facilities have been obtained by the Department of Justice and Equality at the following address: Tom Johnson House (Beggars Bush), Haddington Road, Dublin 4. An email address has been provided to Judge McCartan and forwarded to the Stardust Relatives and Victims Committee for the purposes of facilitating contact between Judge McCartan and the Committee. However, the Committee has decided not to engage with the Judge to date.
In parallel with the assessment process, my Department has met and corresponded with the Committee and its advisors on a number of occasions in relation to historical monies that the Committee claims are owed to it. The Committee believes that the Exchequer should be liable for payment of those monies and has declined to engage with the proposed Judge McCartan process until the historical fees issue is resolved to its satisfaction.
Discussions to date have not led to a resolution on this issue; however, my Department remains open to continuing to correspond and meet with the Committee to try to resolve the issue. It is my Department's intention that these discussions remain separate from the proposed Judge McCartan process.
