Madden & Finucane
Ranked
Number 1
by Chambers,
the clients guide
to the legal profession
Chambers and Partners have been publishing their
world-famous guides to the legal profession since 1990. The key to the success
of their legal directories and the validity of their awards is the in-depth,
unbiased research conducted by their team of highly qualified and experienced
researchers. View more
Madden & Finucane
present
the Madden & Finucane
and Pat Finucane
Aisling Awards
The Aisling Bursaries, launched in March 2000, are
an educational initiative between Belfast Media Group and West Belfast
Partnership. The Aisling Bursaries are designed to help students defray their
education and training costs.
View
more
|
|
Killer seeks guarantee visits are not covertly monitored
15 January 2010 --
A convicted killer has launched a High Court bid to secure assurances that his
prison visits are not being subjected to covert surveillance.
Louis Maguire, who is serving a 24-year sentence for shooting his wife's former
lover, wants a guarantee that conversations with her are not being monitored in
secret.
The 44-year-old is being held at Maghaberry Prison while awaiting an appeal
against his conviction for the murder of David Barnes in March 2003.
Mr Barnes (39) was shot in the head as he lay in bed beside his girlfriend at
his flat offf the Antrim Road in north Belfast.
Maguire, formerly of Whinpark Road, Newtownards, was on home leave while serving
a prison sentence for robbery at the time of the killing.
Opening an application for leave to seek a judicial review yesterday, his
barrister told the court that evidence gathered from previous covert
surveillance had then been used at trial against Maguire.
"There is interference with the right to privacy and family life because visits
from family members may be monitored," Barry Macdonald QC said.
The case now hinges on a decision on whether it should proceed at the High Court
or be determined by a tribunal set up under the Regulation of Investigatory
Powers Act 2000 to examine issues involving the intelligence services.
Mr Macdonald argued that because the case was being brought against the Prison
Service it should remain a judicial review application.
"Mr Maguire is not making a complaint about conduct in the past," he said.
"He knows from his experience certain things have happened in the past and he is
now seeking an assurance these things will not happen in the future."
According to the barrister the case was now about a question of law.
Peter Coll, for the Prison Service, argued that even if the court held that the
Investigatory Powers Tribunal did not have exclusive jurisdiction it would still
provide an effective alternative remedy.
Mr Coll also said the legal challenge was academic because, under prison rules,
all visits should take place within hearing of warders.
"It's difficult to see where the application on covert surveillance comes into
play," he said.
"There is a clear, specific right on the part of the prison authorities to be
right there openly."
Mr Justice Treacy reserved his initial ruling on the jurisdictional issue as to
whether the case should be heard in court or at a tribunal.
Following the hearing Maguire's solicitor, Fearghal Shiels of Madden and
Finucane, said the privacy issues at stake were crucial.
"The potential implications for this defendant and future defendants are
enormous as such assurances, if denied, would controvert the protections
afforded by article 8 of the European Convention," he said.
|
|
more..
|
|
|