A legal challenge to the findings of the Oireachtas sub-committee into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings is being considered by some victims' relatives who are seeking a public inquiry in the State, the Dublin City Coroner's court was told yesterday.
An application by the group of relatives for an adjournment of the inquests into the 34 deaths on May 17th, 1974, which begin on April 27th, was refused by the coroner, Dr Brian Farrell.
Mr Eoin McGonigal SC, for the O'Brien and O'Neill families and Mr Frank Massey, said the court had resumed to consider the scope of the inquests. If the Oireachtas sub-committee had reported by March 10th as expected, they would have been able to give full consideration to the question of scope.
"The sub-committee only reported on March 31st and, as a result, we are actively considering the possibility of legal proceedings, either by way of judicial review or a declaratory action," he said.
The sub-committee found that while a public inquiry would have been the preferred form of inquiry under the tribunals Act in the State, it could not compel the production of documents or witnesses from outside the jurisdiction.
It therefore concluded an inquiry in Britain or Northern Ireland was required.
Mr McGonigal said what the sub-committee seemed to be saying was that the next-of-kin were entitled to an investigation.
"We're saying if the persons we represent are entitled to a right of investigation under the tribunals Act, it must be enforced in this State, and it is not up to the sub-committee or the Dáil to pass that responsibility to Northern Ireland or Britain," he said.
If they obtained a public inquiry that would be a remedy of their right to investigate. If they had the right to investigate, the scope of the inquest would be reduced substantially and would take days not weeks, he said.
"If a public inquiry is not set up, we would say the only place left is the inquest and therefore the scope becomes extremely relevant," he stated. Mr Patrick Gageby SC, for Justice for the Forgotten, said the majority of the families were anxious for the inquests to proceed. With the 30th anniversary in May an adjournment would not be in the public interest or in the interests of his clients.
Dr Farrell said whatever legal proceedings were being contemplated, it was not, on the face of it, relevant to the inquests,
They were conducting proceedings under the Coroner's Act and he was not convinced the inquests had anything to do with what the families may wish to do in the superior courts.
"The scope of the inquest is set out in statute and common law and also by decisions of the Supreme Court. I am not certain if any results of a public tribunal would affect the scope of the inquests," he said.
He said he declined the adjournment at this stage."I will endeavour to proceed with the inquests subject to any other developments." He adjourned the hearing until Friday, April 16th.