Sir, - Like the general public and others in the legal profession, we have been following with great interest the unfolding events of the Sheedy case. In your edition of April 19th Carol Coulter correctly pointed out that one aspect which the issue has highlighted is the impression that middle-class people have better access to our legal system than working-class and unemployed people. This is true to the extent that a middle-class person is, in a general way, better informed about our legal system, has greater financial resources, and may even know the "right people".
We were very surprised, however, by Ms. Coulter's statement that "those with less resources are thrown on the mercy of the overworked legal aid scheme . . ." Persons of limited financial means, whether on low wages or unemployed, when brought before a court as a defendant in a criminal matter, can apply to be assigned a solicitor under the criminal legal aid scheme. If deemed eligible for legal aid the defendant is then free to choose whichever solicitor he or she wishes from the panel of solicitors.
A large number of solicitors' firms practising criminal law are represented on this panel, which in effect means that defendants can choose from some of the best criminal lawyers in the State, at no cost to themselves. It could not be less true that the less well off person is thrown on the mercy of the criminal legal aid scheme. In such an instance, the indigent defendant has the rare luxury (albeit in less than felicitous circumstances) of being able to "buy" the best.
Solicitors on the criminal legal aid panel are not overworked by the number of clients they may have under the scheme. Our system is quite unlike the US Public Defender system in this regard. In Ireland all such clients are accepted voluntarily in the same way as private clients are. Nor does it arise that a defendant cannot obtain a solicitor because there is a shortage. The fees paid to the solicitor by the State under the legal aid scheme are modest and are considerably less than fees paid by private clients. There is no question, however, that the legally aided client is afforded any less service than any other client.
From our own experience of practising criminal law under the legal aid scheme, and from personal knowledge of our solicitor colleagues, any person qualifying for legal aid receives the same quality of professional service as would any other client. Indeed, it is no exaggeration to state that solicitors are thoroughly dedicated to such clients to the extent of getting up out of bed in the middle of the night and travelling to visit them in a Garda station, for which work, incidentally, we are not paid any fee by the State.
While the edifice of our legal system may have trembled in response to recent shock waves, we can be glad that it is fundamentally sound and always ready to effect improvement. - Yours, etc., P. Byrne, A. Brennan, Bertrams Law Firm, Upper Abbey Street, Dublin 1.
Carol Coulter writes: The solicitors on the legal aid panel undoubtedly provide an excellent service. However, there is a difference between choosing a solicitor from a panel and choosing one through personal knowledge. Barristers are also provided by the free legal aid scheme, but until a recent settlement with the Department of Justice were so badly paid that the whole system was under threat.