Legal Aid

I thank the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration for making himself available for this Topical Issue. It is an example his colleagues in Cabinet would do well to follow but I commend him for doing so. I also wish to take the opportunity to put on record my best wishes to Deputy Michael Healy-Rae following the disgraceful attack on him earlier. I am sure the Minister came away from the "RTÉ Investigates" programme like myself. There were seriously concerning revelations in respect of protected disclosures. This Topical Issue is not to discuss that, but that will be a big test for him as Minister. For public confidence in An Garda Síochána and the accountability and structures that were put in place following previous scandals, the public need and deserve to know that they are operating effectively. I am sure we will be discussing that. Regarding the criminal legal aid dispute, it is appropriate that on the first day back, however late, we are getting an opportunity to discuss this matter. The Minister has said that the courts are operating effectively despite the ongoing dispute within the criminal legal aid scheme. That is not the reality. As recently as today, Judge John Hughes in the District Court has warned us all. He sent a very strong warning that people were going to get hurt if this was not resolved. Despite the picture that the Minister has tried to paint, there is chaos in our courts as result of the dispute and the withdrawal of many criminal legal aid practitioners. The dispute has caused widespread adjournments. It has delayed trials and sentencing hearings and created growing case backlogs. It has restricted access to legal representation for many defendants, and it has undermined the efficient operation of the courts. It has done the exact opposite of the Minister's stated objectives, and I know from a number of conversations that it has caused serious distress for many victims who are seeking justice. We know that habeas corpus applications have increased, as some applicants who did not have legal representation have challenged the legality of their detention and sought release from custody. Garda interviews conducted without a solicitor raise concerns and will undoubtedly lead to legal challenges around fair procedures, informed legal advice, the admissibility of evidence and the protection of suspects' rights, and the risk of convictions being challenged. I do not know, and maybe the Minister can confirm, whether he is aware of the reports that the dispute has contributed to significant numbers of defendants actually failing to attend court because in many cases they rely on the solicitors for information. It was reported that more than 25 bench warrants were issued by a single judge in just under two hours in Dublin District Court when around three quarters of listed defendants failed to appear at just one court sitting. The Minister's approach has been one of arrogance. There has been a failure to engage properly and that is at the root of the reason this dispute is ongoing. I have a number of questions that I want to put to him. Does he accept that criminal legal aid is a fundamental part of ensuring access to justice and the right to a fair trial? How many Garda interviews have taken place without a solicitor present because a legal aid solicitor was not available? Can he confirm how many habeas corpus applications have been before the High Court since 1 July and how much this has cost the State? Is he concerned that some people are held on remand who should not be, while others are being released on bail as a result of habeas corpus applications, when that is probably not appropriate? How many adjournments have resulted from the ongoing dispute?

I thank the Deputy for putting down this important Topical Issue. Of course, I am here to answer it. I am the Minister for justice, and it is a very important issue that he has raised. I have great respect for not just solicitors and barristers, but for everyone who operates within the legal system. I worked as a barrister for 30 years. On every case I did, I worked with solicitors, so I am fully aware of the central role played by the legal profession in the effective administration of justice and that is particularly so in the area of administration of criminal justice. To answer the question the Deputy put directly to me, I fully accept that the criminal legal aid scheme is fundamental to upholding the constitutional and human right to a legal defence. I want the Deputy to know as well that the only reason I have introduced these reforms is to try to make the system more effective and efficient while ensuring that those accused of crimes are provided with legal representation. The reform of the criminal legal aid fee structure in the District Court does not affect the ability of solicitors to engage in criminal legal aid work. The changes I have introduced are changes to the payment structure in the District Court but the advantage of having a forum such as this is that I am able to get across other aspects that do not get much attention. On 1 July, I introduced an 8% increase for practitioners who are operating in the criminal legal aid payment area and that is for practitioners in the Circuit Criminal Court, Central Criminal Court and the appeal courts. This represents the total restoration of the criminal legal aid fees that were cut under FEMPI and that had not been reinstated by previous Ministers, but that I reinstated. In terms of where we are at present, I accept that there are different issues in different parts of the country. Dublin is problematic, but the Deputy has to accept that in other parts of the country, the scheme has been accepted by solicitors. More than 600 solicitors remain on the criminal legal aid panel as criminal cases continue to be dealt with in the courts and, just as a sign of it, 24 solicitors who resigned from the panel have reapplied to be reinstated and have been reinstated to the panel. Since 1 July when the new system came in, approximately 1,430 new certificates for legal aid in the District Court have issued. Under this system, for cases in the District Court, regardless of the number of appearances, a set fee of €520 was payable to solicitors, replacing the appearance-based sliding scale fee. The structure provides for a full separate set fee for each defendant in court on a given day and removes the link between payments and the number of appearances or legal aid certificates granted. One of the factors we have to look at, and the Deputy is an intelligent person who looks at data, is that the volume of cases in the District Court has decreased in recent years, yet expenditure on legal aid in the District Court has more than doubled from €19 million in 2015 to €41 million in 2025. It was for that reason that the Department conducted the review of 350,000 District Court cases that took place in 2022 and 2023. That review established that when there is criminal legal aid, those cases take, on average, 313 days in the District Court and without it, 133 days, so while cases with criminal legal aid took significantly longer than those without, the outcomes were similar. The reforms aim to address the structural issues identified during this review, such as excessive adjournments resulting from the payment per appearance model, and to deliver a reformed criminal legal aid system that works for everyone. I am not suggesting that the Deputy is solely focusing on the interests of solicitors but my priority when I look at this is what is in the best interests of court users and the public, When it comes to trying to introduce reforms and efficiencies in the District Court, I have to look at the payment structure that I have put in place. If that structure is incentivising adjournments and delays, I am responsible for that and I have to do something about it.

I never pretend to have a better understanding of the court system than the Minister, as somebody who has practised. As he said, I just look at the facts before me. Even if we were to accept the bona fides of the his rationale for introducing this system, and he says the primary reason is a more effective and efficient court service. Nobody could argue that we have a more effective court system as a result of these changes brought in. The court system is in disarray. The secondary reason is the costs, the excessive costs, as the Minister called them. I have concern that the flat rate model will actually lead to increased costs because, as by his admission, many people will get substantially more for some cases than they would have previously. However, we have to accept the reality and the reality, as I know it, is that in July of last year, there were 10,000 plus criminal legal aid certificates. In July of this year, that number was 702. There is no way the Minister can attribute, as he suggested, that to be the result of the lack of adjournments or more efficiencies. That is a result of solicitors refusing to engage. The area that I have a little bit of knowledge about, because the justice committee, which I Chair, has carried out extensive work on it, is the criminal legal aid scheme, which, again, is an absolute disarray in many parts-----

It is the civil.

-----of the State. I apologise, I meant the civil legal aid scheme, which saw a 60% reduction that has been attributed to the fee model that was applied there. The Minister has repeatedly stated that he has a responsibility to address the excessive adjournments, and I agree with that. However, he follows it by saying the excessive adjournments resulting from the pay structure. Yet, he has provided zero evidence that it is actually solicitors or their want to get additional payments that is actually the cause of a significant minority, never mind a majority, of the adjournments I appeal to the Minister in the strongest possible terms. I know there is a political benefit for him in this in terms of being seen to face down solicitors. They probably have about as much sympathy among the public as politicians, and I think they will accept that. They carry out a critically important piece of work. Let us forget about solicitors, however, because people who are seeking access to justice, including victims, need to be assured that our court services are operating. Right now, they are not. It is the Minister's imperative, in my view, to engage with the stakeholders and engage constructively to bring this matter to a resolution as speedily as possible.

The Law Society produced a very good report earlier this year. One of the issues identified in the report, Justice Indicators, is that criminal cases in Ireland take considerably longer than criminal cases in the rest of Europe. In terms of the process of trying to speed up the administration of justice, there are very few levers I have. However, I genuinely believe one of the levers I have is the mechanism of payment. If I have in place a mechanism of payment that incentivises adjournments and delays, that is necessarily going to happen. The Deputy mentioned that in July there were only 700 or so certificates, I think he said. The solicitors across the board were on strike in July. The new data we have since the courts opened on 1 September show that about 1,430 new certificates for legal aid have issued since then and around 700 of them have issued in the past two weeks or so. That is a significant commitment.

What was the corresponding figure last year?

Every Friday I see the list coming in. It is happening across the country that the criminal legal aid system is operating within the District Courts. I appreciate there is an issue in respect of Dublin. The Deputy said that I might not receive political benefit in this. There is no political benefit in this for me by having a row with solicitors. I do not want to have a row with solicitors. I want to have an effective criminal justice system operating and I want to do something more about civil legal aid as well. I am sure Deputy Carthy will keep me to account in respect of that. The only reason I am introducing this new model is that I genuinely believe that this is going to improve efficiency within the court. If we look at the data we have at present, we see that 75% of the cases that have concluded since 1 July concluded within one day. So there is a huge advantage in having a flat fee, which is a generous flat fee of €520. When somebody is before the courts and it can be dealt with promptly, let us deal with it promptly. I have engaged with The Law Society. I very much respect the work it does. I sent a letter to its president yesterday. I will continue to engage with them and I have said in respect-----

You sent a letter saying you would not engage with them.

I have changed before and I said in the letter yesterday that when it comes to the issues such as the Children's Court, once I get the data if it looks like I need to change it, then I will change it.