Fresh pressure is to be exerted on the Government today to provide an explanation about the controversial case of a Dublin architect, Philip Sheedy, who was sentenced to four years' imprisonment, released a year later, and is now back in jail for dangerous driving causing death.
A mother of two, Mrs Anne Ryan, died in the incident involving Sheedy in March 1996.
The Assistant Chief State Solicitor, Mr John Corcoran, told The Irish Times yesterday that his office believed a "mistake" had been made when it discovered last November that Sheedy's case had been listed for hearing just over a year after he had been sentenced by Judge Joseph Mathews.
On November 9th the then Dublin Circuit Court judge, Judge Cyril Kelly - now a High Court judge - suspended the outstanding three years of Sheedy's sentence.
Neither the DPP nor the Garda had been told the case was listed for hearing on that date.
"On November 8th, we got a list up from the courts. The DPP v Sheedy was listed. It was the first we heard of it. We did not know why it was on the list. It was a mystery and we thought it was a mistake," Mr Corcoran said.
A clerk from the Chief State Solicitor's Office was sent to the Circuit Court the next day with the file on the case. He anticipated being told that an error had been made on the list and that the case would not be heard. However, the case proceeded.
"When the case was called we had no solicitor, no counsel and there were no gardai present," Mr Corcoran added.
The first the Chief State Solicitor's Office learned of the fact that the remainder of Sheedy's sentence had been effectively quashed by Judge Kelly was when Mrs Ryan's husband complained at what had happened, he said.
On discovering that three years of the four-year sentence had been suspended, the DPP sought a judicial review of Judge Kelly's decision. However, the defendant withdrew his opposition to the DPP's application and presented himself for readmission to Mountjoy prison.
The Circuit Court Office is responsible for compiling lists of cases due for hearing in the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court. Either the DPP or counsel for the defence can request that a case be listed.
As political demands for an explanation mounted, Labour joined Fine Gael in calling for clarification of the circumstances.
Labour's justice spokesman, Mr Brendan Howlin, last night said he had submitted Special Notice Questions on the matter and might seek an adjournment to allow a Dail debate.
The case raised "disturbing questions as to whether there was any improper interference with the administration of criminal justice by the courts," he said.
"In summary, three unusual things occurred. First, one judge took over the case of another without having been appointed as his substitute or successor.
"Second, an application was heard by the court without any notice having been given to the DPP. Finally, a sentence was purportedly reviewed even though there was no provision before the court to allow any such review," Mr Howlin said.
It was "peculiar and, at worst, sinister" that after serving only one year of his sentence, Sheedy's case reappeared before Judge Cyril Kelly, without any notice having been given to the DPP.
Because the defendant withdrew his opposition to the DPP's application and returned to prison, there was a danger that what actually took place might never be discovered, he added.
However, the Minister for Justice could not argue that this was a matter for the courts since the listing of cases was an administrative issue, conducted by personnel who were civil servants of his Department. Mr O'Donoghue was accountable to the Dail for the actions of his Departmental officers and was obliged to answer questions as to their official activities.