The Attorney General has informed the High Court that he will not be initiating criminal contempt proceedings against teacher Enoch Burke or three members of his family over their conduct in court “at this time”.
Senior Counsel Rossa Fanning told Mr Justice Brian Cregan that he had given the matter very careful consideration and had decided to address it personally in open court, given the significant public interest involved, reports RTE.
The judge had previously asked the Attorney General to consider pursuing such proceedings against Mr Burke, as well as his mother Martina, sister Ammi and brother Isaac, due to their behaviour during hearings before him.
Mr Fanning said the cases involving Enoch Burke raised serious concerns about respect for the rule of law. He said court orders must be complied with and that the intentional disruption of court proceedings by individuals or groups was unacceptable and deserving of condemnation, reports RTE.
However, he said he believed there would be no practical benefit in pursuing criminal contempt proceedings against Enoch Burke, who was already imprisoned for civil contempt after breaching a court order.
He said such proceedings would be futile because any penalty imposed would merely duplicate the sanction already imposed through the civil contempt process. He added that the issue of Mr Burke’s liberty remained within Mr Burke’s own control, reports RTE.
The Attorney General said that in relation to the other members of the Burke family, he had serious concerns arising from his review of the court transcripts. However, he said he had reached the difficult conclusion that criminal contempt proceedings should not be initiated at this time.
Mr Fanning said there was a distinction between unruly conduct, “borne out of heightened emotion” on one hand and criminal contempt on the other. He said the question was whether that line had been crossed, adding that it would have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and that each individual’s conduct would need to be examined, reports RTE.
Mr Fanning also told the court that he had considered alternative remedies available in cases of criminal contempt. He said a judge could order the removal of a disruptive individual from the courtroom, and that someone who refused to comply with a garda’s direction to desist or leave could be prosecuted.
He also noted that there were thousands of other litigants waiting for their cases to be heard, reports RTE.
He said that through no fault of the judiciary, cases involving Enoch Burke and other members of his family had taken up a “disproportionate amount” of court time, to the detriment of other litigants nationwide. He said that bringing criminal contempt proceedings before the President of the High Court would further add to the already substantial workload of that judge.
Mr Fanning said he was also mindful of the direct financial cost of any such proceedings. He said the Burkes might be entitled to seek legal aid, but even if they were not, the taxpayer would still bear the cost of legal representation, and that the proceedings would realistically involve a significant expense, reports RTE.
Finally, he said that given the history of the cases involving Enoch Burke, even successful criminal contempt proceedings would likely result only in modest fines or short prison terms. These, he said, “may reinforce an unfounded sense of martyrdom”, but were “unlikely to provoke any damascene conversion”, reports RTE.
Mr Fanning told the judge that his decision not to proceed could be revisited if circumstances were to change.
The judge thanked the Attorney General for his consideration of the issue, but said his initial reaction was one of disappointment and surprise. He suggested that transcripts did not fully capture the tone and tenor of what had occurred week after week in the Burke cases, reports RTE.
However, he said he would reflect on the matter over the Christmas period and would decide whether to initiate criminal contempt proceedings himself by referring the matter to another judge.
Judge Cregan said criminal contempt proceedings had been used for hundreds of years to ensure that courts could police their own proceedings and maintain order in the courtroom, reports RTE.
The court also heard that a Disciplinary Appeals Panel heard Enoch Burke’s appeal against his dismissal from Wilson’s Hospital School on Saturday, during a hearing that lasted from 10am until 6pm.
The panel is required to make its recommendation within ten school days, meaning a decision must be reached by 9 January. The school’s board of management must then consider that decision, reports RTE.
Judge Cregan said this could have implications for Enoch Burke’s continued imprisonment and said he would list the matter again on 14 January.
Enoch Burke appeared in court via video link. He said the DAP was “very far from being a done deal” and said everything returned to what occurred in the High Court in 2022, when the original injunction against him was granted. He said that issue would have to be addressed, reports RTE.
He said “we could wish with all our hearts that this was going away” but he said that was not going to happen. He told the court “the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends towards justice,” reports RTE.
Tell us your thoughts in the Facebook post and share this with your friends.
