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
|
|
Convicted killer launches High Court bid
14 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 secretly
monitored.
The 44-year-old is being held at Maghaberry Prison while awaiting his appeal
against being found guilty of murdering David Barnes in March 2003.
Mr Barnes, 39, was shot in the head as he lay in bed beside his girlfriend at
his flat on 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 today, his barrister
told the court evidence gathered from previous covert surveillance was then used
at trial against Maguire.
Barry Macdonald QC said: "There is interference with the right to privacy and
family life because visits from family members may be monitored."
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 it was being brought against the Prison Service
it should remain a judicial review application.
He said: "Mr Maguire is not making a complaint about conduct in the past. 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.
But 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 claimed the legal challenge was academic because, under prison
rules, all visits should take place within hearing of warders.
He added: "It's difficult to see where the application on covert surveillance
comes into play. There is a clear, specific right on the part of the prison
authorities to be right there openly."
The judge, Mr Justice Treacy, reserved his initial ruling on the jurisdictional
issue of whether the case should be heard in court or at a tribunal.
Following the hearing Maguire's solicitor, Fearghal Shiels of Madden and
Finucane, claimed the privacy issues at stake were crucial.
He said: "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."
|
|
more..
|
|
|