The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) is free to resume his attempts to prosecute Mr Charles Haughey on charges of obstructing the McCracken tribunal, following a High Court ruling yesterday.
The High Court challenge by the DPP to the indefinite deferral of Mr Haughey's trial may have been dismissed but in effect the judgment has freed the DPP to go back to the Circuit Court whenever he wishes.
There is no doubt the DPP will go back to Judge Haugh to seek a date for Mr Haughey's trial. The only uncertainty is when that is likely to happen. The recent medical reports on Mr Haughey's state of health submitted to the Moriarty tribunal and the request by the chairman for an independent assessment will undoubtedly have a bearing on the DPP's decision on when to reapply.
One source said the DPP would be taking into consideration the medical reports on Mr Haughey's health. This indicates that although the DPP could go into the Circuit Court on Monday, he is more likely to wait until Mr Justice Moriarty's ruling before making the application. The source said: "The DPP will certainly be going to the Circuit Court. There's no doubt about that, as soon as it is proper to do so."
Both sides considered they had gained in yesterday's judgment. Mr Haughey's team successfully fought the DPP's challenge and was awarded costs. The DPP side, however, is likely to place importance on the fact that the DPP can now go back to Judge Haugh and re-start proceedings.
In June, Judge Haugh had placed an indefinite stay on the trial of the former Taoiseach because, he said, there was a real and substantial risk Mr Haughey would not receive a fair trial and a jury could be influenced.
The DPP challenged the order, contending the Circuit Court judge had no jurisdiction to make it.
Yesterday in the High Court, Miss Justice Carroll dismissed the DPP's challenge, stating that the judge's order was an adjournment and therefore he had the jurisdiction to make it.
She also said the "fade factor" was already operating in relation to publicity and it would be up to Mr Haughey, in the Circuit Court, to prove there was a real and substantial risk he could not receive a fair trial.