A judge has stalled a drugs case from being returned to crown court for trial on being informed the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) were seeking anonymity for witnesses but failed to provide notice to Press.
The PPS have consistently refused to do this, rejecting Press complaints and challenges, which went to the upper levels of management.
Despite numerous judges stating the PPS is equally bound by the rules of advance notice to Press when seeking any order which impacts on publication, the position remains unchanged.
Press fought a long and, at times, bitter battle to ensure defence lawyers adhered to the regulations set down for reporting restriction applications, which ultimately led to the Judicial Studies Board (JSB) publishing guidance in 2019, which largely mirrors that used in England and Wales issued by the Judicial College.
While the majority of defence lawyers now comply, the PPS implacably insist the regulations do not apply to them, contending: “The JSB Guidance is for judiciary”.
That’s despite both defence and Press adhering to the same guidance.
Pushed further the PPS dismissed this as “a matter for the court”.
Guidance for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) – the England and Wales counterpart – states: “Prosecutors should have regard to the (Judicial College) guidance which provides a practical guide for Judges and Media on the statutory and common law principles which should be applied. Any restrictions on reporting is contrary to the general rule in favour of open justice. Prosecutors should not apply for reporting restrictions themselves unless they feel they are essential and must comply and encourage compliance with Criminal Procedure Rules.”
This was previously put to the PPS who did not respond.
However, there was unequivocal clarification in Dungannon Magistrates’ Court after District Judge Francis Rafferty set out the position in full.
The case in question relates to two men – Aodhan Holbrook (34) from Killyman Road, Dungannon and Conor Peter Jackson (32) from Tulnacross Road, Cookstown who are facing drugs charges dating back to 2016.
The committal was scheduled for the most recent sitting however, the day before the hearing, the NI Court Service media lists were updated to show anonymity applications for a number of PPS witnesses had been added.
Press contacted the court ahead of the hearing, copying in the Lady Chief Justice, advising the PPS had – yet again – failed to provide notice.
It was pointed out this is a continuing issue, referencing the section of guidance which states: “The burden lies on the party seeking a derogation from open justice to persuade the court that it is necessary on the basis of clear and cogent evidence.”
It is therefore necessary to permit Press input and advance notice is not just a requirement but a courtesy, which would be afforded to any other party.
When the case was called Judge Rafferty stated: “I have received communication from the Press. The PPS have failed to put them on notice. Everyone will be familiar with the concept and practice of open justice in all courts. Press – in all circumstances – should be put on notice of any party making an application for anonymity.”
Given the PPS had failed to do so, he refused to allow the committal to proceed.
“As the Press were not put on notice nor given an opportunity to consider the application and make such representations as are appropriate.”
Adjourning until June 11, Judge Rafferty ordered the PPS to: “Advise the Press by June 4, who will be invited to make written submissions.”
On conclusion of the hearing the PPS were provided with the judge’s ruling however there was no response.
