Sinn Fein's Stance on the Special Criminal Courts

gormdubhgorm

I think SF will never attract any middle ground voters, while trying to appeal to their diehard supporters. Wanting to abolish the SCC seems ludicrous in such a small country.
It will give a major problem for jurors as seen by http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/crime-gang-caught-with-details-of-murder-jury-26638606.html in other court cases.
It is dangerous. Poorly thought out policies like this that SF have that will prevent them attracting new votes.

Manach

Perhaps the fabled middle might be muddled. In that SF might be like a broken clock in terms of policies but on occasion they highlight an issue like the SCC. It might be a tad self serving on their part, but AFAIR there have been numerous international criticisms of this court as not being in tune with the human rights obligations inherent under Irish membership of the ECHR. That the court be abolished might be a step far, but edited to be more in tune with human rights best practice is not unreasonable.

gormdubhgorm

Manach wrote: »

Perhaps the fabled middle might be muddled. In that SF might be like a broken clock in terms of policies but on occasion they highlight an issue like the SCC. It might be a tad self serving on their part, but AFAIR there have been numerous international criticisms of this court as not being in tune with the human rights obligations inherent under Irish membership of the ECHR. That the court be abolished might be a step far, but edited to be more in tune with human rights best practice is not unreasonable.

Fair point tweaking it would be an idea, but I think the likes of Amnesty International and the ECHR view the world through the prism of an idealistic world where the softest option can always be adopted. Also International Law and ECHR are more often then not ignored by governments during wartime.
If governments can ignore it what are dangerous criminal gangs going to do during thier day to day activities, if there is further safeguards?
Also Human Rights law always seems to be swayed towards the perpetrator rather then the victim, in my view.

I realise that Sinn Fein has a history with the SCC but I really believe that they are missing a trick by just saying that they want to abolish it. Particularly with the current climate in Dublin.

oscarBravo

Some of the criticism I've seen of the SCC involves it not having a jury. Granted, that's unusual in common law jurisdictions, but it's far from unusual in other countries.

hmmm

Sinn Fein are the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing. Externally they have all these progressive policies, but scrape the veneer off and you get policies like these which are written by an army council somewhere. You'll note that even though it has been highlighted & is a vote killer, all the Sinn Fein TDs are sticking rigidly to the line that it must go - it is very much a core policy, and everyone knows why it is a core policy.

The only real problem for them is that this policy has been exposed and highlighted - I'm sure they'd love to go back to talking about how gay friendly they are and how much they are against water taxes (these by the way are all policies that would be discarded in a moment if they thought it would get them into power).

satguy

The SCC can stay,, if and when we see some of the Fine Gael golden circle up in front of it for tax dodging and Phone licenses going astray..

oscarBravo

satguy wrote: »

The SCC can stay,, if and when we see some of the Fine Gael golden circle up in front of it for tax dodging and Phone licenses going astray..

Why would you need the SCC for that?

satguy

Because the Fine Gael golden circle seem to only in front of tribunals and inquiries, where, as in The Moriarty Tribunal the judge had no power to imprison...

But Slab ....?

oscarBravo

satguy wrote: »

Because the Fine Gael golden circle seem to only in front of tribunals and inquiries, where, as in The Moriarty Tribunal the judge had no power to imprison...

But Slab ....?

I have no idea what this means. If you feel that "golden circle" members are guilty of criminality, why would they appear before the SCC rather than before a regular criminal court?

NIMAN

Getting rid of the SCC is a hard thing to defend.

A lot of the scumbags who appear in it deserve all they get, and the vast majority of the public would want to see these people put away and not allow them to intimidate jurors to try to get off.

You can say its against human rights not to be tried by your peers, but innocent people getting threatened and even shot is also against human rights.

I think SF are agruing against it for obvious reasons, their past history with it and the fact that its what expected of them.

gormdubhgorm

hmmm wrote: »

Sinn Fein are the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing. Externally they have all these progressive policies, but scrape the veneer off and you get policies like these which are written by an army council somewhere. You'll note that even though it has been highlighted & is a vote killer, all the Sinn Fein TDs are sticking rigidly to the line that it must go - it is very much a core policy, and everyone knows why it is a core policy.

The only real problem for them is that this policy has been exposed and highlighted - I'm sure they'd love to go back to talking about how gay friendly they are and how much they are against water taxes (these by the way are all policies that would be discarded in a moment if they thought it would get them into power).

It has that real feel about it. But it does not make sense to me tactically you would think that Sinn Fein would want to be getting rid of these polices (gradually) and going for the populous ones like you mentioned. I am a bit baffled by it, as it a vote killer as you said. It would definitely turn the floating voter off them.
I am starting to think that they stick to this line on the SCC because it plays better up in the six counties, otherwise they would face a backlash up there?

satguy

oscarBravo wrote: »

I have no idea what this means. If you feel that "golden circle" members are guilty of criminality, why would they appear before the SCC rather than before a regular criminal court?

Correct ,, why would someone ever be called up in front of the SCC on tax fraud..

""Thomas 'Slab' Murphy is facing a potential prison term of up to five years after he was convicted of tax fraud at the non-jury Special Criminal Court.""

A man with no previous convictions ,, Ever..

But if you are in the FG "golden circle" you can send your goons to retrieve a USB stick from someones safe, and the judge will let you keep it..

If your Enda's best pal,, like Frank Flannery you get to help out, now that REHAB is no longer the cash cow it used to be..

It just seems that what should work for us all in a good way, can be turned round to work against us, while still helping out the big guys..

zl1whqvjs75cdy

satguy wrote: »

Correct ,, why would someone ever be called up in front of the SCC on tax fraud..

""Thomas 'Slab' Murphy is facing a potential prison term of up to five years after he was convicted of tax fraud at the non-jury Special Criminal Court.""

A man with no previous convictions ,, Ever..

But if you are in the FG "golden circle" you can send your goons to retrieve a USB stick from someones safe, and the judge will let you keep it..

If your Enda's best pal,, like Frank Flannery you get to help out, now that REHAB is no longer the cash cow it used to be..

It just seems that what should work for us all in a good way, can be turned round to work against us, while still helping out the big guys..

I'm not sure you understand what the scc is for.

satguy

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

I'm not sure you understand what the scc is for.

Yes I do,, it's for settling old scores with 68 year old farmers.. A guy that had money in black sacks in his barn,,

Ronin247

With the possibility of anonimity for Juries, Video trials, screening and a host of other options there should be no need for most SCC trials. I would agree to it in certain trials .

Sinn Feins opposition to it is in line with Amnesty and a host of other well respected bodies, but one issue I feel is not being talked about is the fact that most Judges are political appointees...... Given the absolute hatred of Fine Gael towards Sinn Fein (and to a lesser extent Fianna Fails ) how would anyone expect impartiality.

The Slab Murphy case was ridiculous, it was tax evasion and he had no previous. That is a presumption of guilt before the tax trial began. I would wonder what will happen when the inevitable appeal on something like this occurs. Will Europe uphold the SCC in tax avoidance cases?

gormdubhgorm

Ronin247 wrote: »

With the possibility of anonymity for Juries, Video trials, screening and a host of other options there should be no need for most SCC trials. I would agree to it in certain trials .

Sinn Feins opposition to it is in line with Amnesty and a host of other well respected bodies, but one issue I feel is not being talked about is the fact that most Judges are political appointees...... Given the absolute hatred of Fine Gael towards Sinn Fein (and to a lesser extent Fianna Fails ) how would anyone expect impartiality.

The Slab Murphy case was ridiculous, it was tax evasion and he had no previous. That is a presumption of guilt before the tax trial began. I would wonder what will happen when the inevitable appeal on something like this occurs. Will Europe uphold the SCC in tax avoidance cases?

It is not as if Slab is Al Capone or anything? :rolleyes:
I think the Slab situation sums up the problem Sinn Fein has they are so used to playing these coy games they do not know how to get off the roundabout.
For example Gerry Adams refers to Slab Murphy as "committed republican".
The other problem I see Sinn Fein having is that they are the only All-Ireland party so they have to think how one policy decision effects the North and another effects the South, while at the same time being enveloped by their history.
Calls to abolish the SCC seems to be an example of this, it definitely will not play well in most of the 26 counties, excluding the border areas.

When will Sinn Fein be free from their constraints and be able to behave like a normal political party? It seems an awful pity because the younger generation of Sinn Fein seem afraid to say what they really think as they are bullied into it by the older generation.
Sinn Fein are a wonderfully organised political party but their talents always seem to be divert/constrained and mired by exterior organisations unofficially affiliated to them, where Amnesty International would certainly not apply!

satguy

Maybe the SCC can handle "insider trading" as well as tax avoidance cases, as Catherine Murphy got nowhere with the siteserv share scam.

""Finance Minister Michael Noonan has advised Independent TD Catherine Murphy to contact the Irish Stock Exchange with any allegations of insider training around the sale of Siteserv.""

Maybe it can have some use after all ...

oscarBravo

satguy wrote: »

Yes I do,, it's for settling old scores with 68 year old farmers.. A guy that had money in black sacks in his barn,,

I see the Sinn Féin policy of insulting the electorate's intelligence is alive and well.

satguy

What next for the SCC ,, mothers with no TV Licence.. ??

When we have real crimes to solve..
Can we look at the Goons and that USB stick stored in a save..
The insider trading at Siteserv
The rape of rehab lotteries, with wages paid into The Isle of Man, and the purchase of slightly used coffins from London..

There is one law for FG cronies and buddies.. and one for the rest us..

end of the road

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Fair point tweaking it would be an idea, but I think the likes of Amnesty International and the ECHR view the world through the prism of an idealistic world where the softest option can always be adopted. Also International Law and ECHR are more often then not ignored by governments during wartime.
If governments can ignore it what are dangerous criminal gangs going to do during thier day to day activities, if there is further safeguards?
Also Human Rights law always seems to be swayed towards the perpetrator rather then the victim, in my view.

I realise that Sinn Fein has a history with the SCC but I really believe that they are missing a trick by just saying that they want to abolish it. Particularly with the current climate in Dublin.

the likes of Amnesty International and the ECHR do not view the world through the prism of an idealistic world where the softest option can always be adopted, they live in the real world where human rights are non-negotiable as they should be.
international law and ECHR are often ignored i would agree, but to me governments who ignore them are illegitimate and cannot be trusted.
Human Rights law is not swayed towards the perpetrator rather then the victim, it takes all into account.

Skylinehead

satguy wrote: »

What next for the SCC ,, mothers with no TV Licence.. ??

When we have real crimes to solve..
Can we look at the Goons and that USB stick stored in a save..
The insider trading at Siteserv
The rape of rehab lotteries, with wages paid into The Isle of Man, and the purchase of slightly used coffins from London..

There is one law for FG cronies and buddies.. and one for the rest us..

If you don't consider tax evasion a crime, why do you consider insider trading a crime? It's all the same goal in the end, get more money illegitimately. Also, would the "wages paid into The Isle of Man" be, err, tax evasion? I thought that wasn't a "real crime"?

We all know why Slab was put through the SCC, and why regular tax evaders won't be. You can play stupid all you want with talk of cronyism, TV licenses (seriously?) and coffins, but it's not exactly a strong argument.

end of the road

Skylinehead wrote: »

We all know why Slab was put through the SCC.

yes, we do. which is why the court needs to go

johnnyskeleton

satguy wrote: »

What next for the SCC ,, mothers with no TV Licence.. ??

When we have real crimes to solve..
Can we look at the Goons and that USB stick stored in a save..
The insider trading at Siteserv
The rape of rehab lotteries, with wages paid into The Isle of Man, and the purchase of slightly used coffins from London..

There is one law for FG cronies and buddies.. and one for the rest us..

Mod note:

If you wish to discuss those issues, please provide evidence for same. Otherwise, simply asserting wrongdoing is agains the forum charter, if not the site rules.

newacc2015

satguy wrote: »

Maybe the SCC can handle "insider trading" as well as tax avoidance cases, as Catherine Murphy got nowhere with the siteserv share scam.

I dont think you quite understand the purpose of the SCC. It is to try people, who may intimate the jury. No one in the siteserv incident was connected to a terrorist organisation. They werent going to kill or threaten a jury. Slab may have threatened the jury.

These trials now exist in the UK

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jun/18/criminal-trial-without-jury

I personally cant see how judges who are experts in law cant make an informed decision on whether someone is guilty or not in the SCC. If we questing why judges cant make an informed decision on whether slab is guilty or not. Should we abolish the supreme court, as the judges are interpreting the law rather than a jury?

aliveandkicking

What is the position of SF on the District Court where cases are decided by a judge without a jury? If in their opinion eveyone is entitled to be judged by a jury of their peers the logical conclusion is they would like the District Court to be abolished too.

maccored

I tend to agree with this analysis :

There is “nothing comparable to the Special Criminal Court” in the US or the Scottish, English and Welsh legal systems, according to Dr Liz Campbell, a senior lecturer in criminal law and evidence at the University of Edinburgh.
Ireland’s use of juryless courts is a “historical hangover” associated with the Offences Against the State Act 1939 and probably would not be introduced if they were not already a practice here, she said.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/juryless-courts-in-ireland-a-historical-hangover-1.2530050

johnnyskeleton

maccored wrote: »

I tend to agree with this analysis :



http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/juryless-courts-in-ireland-a-historical-hangover-1.2530050

On the other hand, it is a lot closer to what they have in places like France, Germany, the Netherlands etc.

maccored

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

On the other hand, it is a lot closer to what they have in places like France, Germany, the Netherlands etc.

the diplock courts in the north should have been enough to put people off juryless courts.

Chips Lovell

Would that not be a bit like saying anyone who'd seen Serpico would be put off having a police force?

aliveandkicking

maccored wrote: »

the diplock courts in the north should have been enough to put people off juryless courts.

Does that include the District Court?

gormdubhgorm

maccored wrote: »

I tend to agree with this analysis :



http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/juryless-courts-in-ireland-a-historical-hangover-1.2530050

Yeah Ireland is too small a country to ape the USA "In the US, jurors have on occasion been selected from locations hundreds of miles away from trials to make tampering less likely."

Phoebas

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Yeah Ireland is too small a country to ape the USA "In the US, jurors have on occasion been selected from locations hundreds of miles away from trials to make tampering less likely."

I've served on juries on a number of occasions and on the last one, two of the jurors knew each other personally, many other had mutual friends and a few of us drink in the same pub.

A truly anonymous jury is not possible in Ireland.

maccored

aliveandkicking wrote: »

Does that include the District Court?

why would it? district courts serve a different section of crimes (as Im sure you well know)

maccored

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Would that not be a bit like saying anyone who'd seen Serpico would be put off having a police force?

you are comparing a 1973 movie to real life? How do you reckon that has anything to do with anything?

Godge

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

On the other hand, it is a lot closer to what they have in places like France, Germany, the Netherlands etc.

Sweden only has juries for defamation cases.

Otherwise juries are not used, yet it is regarded as one of the best countries for human rights.

It is supremely ironic that the jury system is a hangover from British justice and that it is Sinn Fein who most want to retain it. If we rejoined the UK, we would have to get rid of the SCC.

Phoebas

Godge wrote: »

Sweden only has juries for defamation cases.

Otherwise juries are not used, yet it is regarded as one of the best countries for human rights.

It is supremely ironic that the jury system is a hangover from British justice and that it is Sinn Fein who most want to retain it. If we rejoined the UK, we would have to get rid of the SCC.

If that happened, we'd need it more than ever. :eek:

Prop Joe

I am actually pretty pro SF and will be voting for them in the up coming election but i am totally against abolishing the Special Criminal Courts,They were set up for seriously dangerous criminals who are guilty of many many crimes before they are brought before the SCC. Jail the fúckrs for good,Know i do understand why they want it rid of human rights and all that but IMO criminals who commit serious crime don't deserve the same rights as law abiding citizens.

Renua's 3 strike policy is something i would largely favor also

end of the road

Prop Joe wrote: »

Renua's 3 strike policy is something i would largely favor

Renua's 3 strike policy would bankrupt the state. where the hell do they think the money would come from to keep everyone who commits 3 crimes in prison for life? its a load of nonsense that was only brought in in america to keep prisons full. i would much rather spend the money on keeping dangerous criminals like murderers and the like locked up instead.

micosoft

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Yeah Ireland is too small a country to ape the USA "In the US, jurors have on occasion been selected from locations hundreds of miles away from trials to make tampering less likely."

Population of Tri State Area is 23 Million. All well within a hundred or so miles. In a country with mass migration. Incomparable to say the least.

micosoft

end of the road wrote: »

Renua's 3 strike policy would bankrupt the state. where the hell do they think the money would come from to keep everyone who commits 3 crimes in prison for life? its a load of nonsense that was only brought in in america to keep prisons full. i would much rather spend the money on keeping dangerous criminals like murderers and the like locked up instead.

Leaving aside it clearly does not work from a Crime, Justice and fundamental human rights perspective as evidenced by California.

Bass Reeves

I prefer the SCC than an Sinn Fein/IRA court as you had in NI. Less chance of a bullet in the back of your head.

In an ideal society you would not need an SCC. However in Italy they use similar courts to deal with the mafia. When dealing with really dangerous criminals society has little or no choice but use heavy handed tactics. In general Irish judges are impartial, unlike the US where elected judges look over there shoulder at popular opinion sometimes when making decisions. If anything they tend to be quite soft in there application of sentence's. We also have to remember in the case of Thomas Slab Murphy that after an 1999 trial a man who gave evidence against him was beaten to death. This may have impacted in which court he was tried in.

maccored

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I prefer the SCC than an Sinn Fein/IRA court as you had in NI.

sure the diplock courts where the same thing as the SCC. :pac:

Godge

maccored wrote: »

sure the diplock courts where the same thing as the SCC. :pac:

Still a lot better than the kangaroo courts.

Sam Russell

maccored wrote: »

sure the diplock courts where the same thing as the SCC. :pac:

Not quite.

The SCC requires the judges to give detailed reasons for decisions which can be appealed.