Justice Minister Jim O’Callaghan
no end in sight
The group said this evening that two core issues with the scheme remain unresolved.
THE ORGANISATION REPRESENTING solicitors in their dispute with Justice Minister Jim O’Callaghan over changes to the criminal legal aid fee model has hit out at him for what it described as “fundamentally unhelpful commentary”.
The dispute has had a significant impact on the legal system over the summer, as criminal legal aid solicitors withdrew their services in protest at reforms to how they are paid.
Speaking on The Journal political podcast The Candidate yesterday, O’Callaghan criticised the Law Society’s approach to the dispute and said:
“One of my concerns is every time I make a concession, the Law Society just bag it and say, ‘Well, we want more’.”
He said he was hopeful the courts would be operating as normal when they return fully from recess in October and that there is a “very vocal group” of solicitors opposed to his reforms, but that a quieter, larger group are happy to work under the new scheme.
Responding to the minister’s comments today, the Law Society said it “firmly rejected” the comments from the minister, which it said “mischaracterise the position” of criminal legal aid practitioners and the Law Society’s engagement on the reforms.
“Contrary to the Minister’s recent public comments, the concerns raised by practitioners have never been with change itself, but with ensuring that any new model is practical, evidence-based, and capable of protecting the constitutional rights of accused people, while remaining sustainable for those who provide publicly funded legal representation,” the Law Society said.
It said that from the outset of the dispute, criminal legal aid solicitors have asked for two core issues with the scheme to be resolved and that, to date, this has not happened.
The first core issue is what the Law Society described as the “unjustifiable treatment” of separate and distinct criminal cases as a single matter where they come before the court on the same day.
The second core issue is in relation to cases of extended duration.
In a letter sent to the minister on 24 August, the Law Society said it sought an update on proposals to resolve these two outstanding issues.
President of the Law Society, Rosemarie Loftus, said: “Criminal law practitioners and the Law Society have been consistent on the issues with the changes to the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme since they were first announced by the Minister.
“There has been no change in the outstanding issues that need to be addressed. For the Minister to say that the Law Society “bags” concessions is fundamentally unhelpful commentary.”
She added that the Law Society has “consistently engaged in good faith throughout this process, putting forward practical proposals aimed at addressing the significant challenges arising from the new scheme”.
“The consistent concerns raised by criminal defence practitioners across the country are genuine. These concerns are focused on ensuring that vulnerable citizens continue to have access to legal representation, as is their constitutional right,” Loftus said.
“The message from practitioners is clear: addressing the two outstanding issues would substantially resolve the remaining concerns about the operation of the scheme. We understand that, if implemented on an interim basis, these measures would make the scheme workable for a significant majority of criminal legal aid practitioners while the Department’s broader review of Criminal Legal Aid and wider criminal justice reforms are completed.”
She added that the Law Society remains committed to “constructive engagement with the Minister and his Department”.
Meanwhile, chair of the Oireachtas Justice Committee, Sinn Féin TD Matt Carthy accused the minister of “mishandling” the issue.
“He charged in like a bull in a China shop, seeking plaudits for taking on the legal profession without any consideration of the impact his actions would have on victims of crime and those seeking justice,” the Cavan-Monaghan TD said.
Carthy said the dispute has had “real consequences for the administration of justice” and said the minister has “failed to present the evidence to back the assertion that legal aid solicitors are primarily responsible for court delays”.
Social Democrats justice spokesperson, TD Gary Gannon, was similarly critical of the minister’s handling of the dispute.
“The minister says he does not want to aggravate this dispute, immediately after accusing the Law Society of simply ‘bagging’ concessions and demanding more. That is precisely the sneering and combative approach which created this crisis in the first place,” Gannon said.
“What the minister calls concessions are, in reality, partial attempts to repair an unworkable scheme that he designed and imposed without meaningful consultation,” he added.
Gannon said the central problem remains that a solicitor can still be required to attend court repeatedly over months or years, “often because of delays caused by the State, and receive no additional payment for that work”.
“His claim that a quiet majority of solicitors are happy with the new scheme is also remarkably convenient and completely unverifiable. The evidence we can see is that solicitors have withdrawn from the scheme, defendants have appeared without representation, victims have faced further delays and the courts have been thrown into chaos,” the Dublin Central TD said.
“Continuing to work under a scheme is not the same as supporting it. Many solicitors will continue because they feel a professional duty towards vulnerable clients and the proper administration of justice. The Minister should not cynically misrepresent that commitment as an endorsement of his policy,” he added.
Gannon urged the minister to revoke the regulations and produce a “sustainable scheme based on evidence”.
According to the Department of Justice, there have been 211 resignations from the criminal legal aid panel since 1 July, and 11 have since asked to rejoin.
In that same period, there have been 630 certs (invoices) for criminal legal aid work received by the Department.