Courts service spent €1.5m on temporary courthouse in Roscommon
In a message to management, Judge James Faughnan lambasted a decision to provide just a single courtroom in Roscommon when two had been available in their old building.
Advertisement
The judge said he was sure the Courts Service would not want a 'light shone' on their lack of foresight in providing sub-par accommodation at significant cost.
Judge Faughnan said that with a general election looming and 'recent OPW disasters' over the Leinster House bike shelter and security hut, bad publicity was very likely.
In an email last September, he said he would 'never dream' of going public but said the situation was likely to come to a head in 2025.
Judge Faughnan said that when the temporary accommodation on the outskirts of Roscommon Town was being planned, he specifically asked for provision of a second courtroom.
Advertisement
He wrote: 'The Courts Service, while on notice of this, then spent over €1.5 million without providing a second courtroom.
'I can only imagine that if that got picked up by the media, there would be an awful lot of questions to answer.'
He said the expenditure on the temporary accommodation would be 'laughable if it wasn't so serious.'
In another message to court management last October, Judge Faughnan said the Courts Service had used up 'all the goodwill' extended to them by legal people working in Roscommon.
Advertisement
He pleaded for a temporary second courtroom on site which he believed could be provided at very little cost. 'It would lend itself to a timber frame type construction which could be erected speedily,' he wrote.
He said the current situation was unsustainable and that a proposed solution to provide temporary facilities in Castlerea Prison was unlikely to work.
Judge Faughnan wrote: 'I do not accept the works carried out in Castlerea to be beneficial as prior to the works, the facilities were Dickensian and have only regularised what was needed for many years.'
The judge was one of three who wrote to the Courts Service outlining serious concerns over their workplace in County Roscommon.
Advertisement
In another letter, Judge Kenneth Connolly said the old courthouse in Roscommon town had been shut down because of the 'very poor' conditions there.
However, he said the new facility on the outskirts of the town had 'not performed' and was 'unsuitable as even a medium-term option".
Judge Connolly said there was little parking, nowhere nearby for jurors or the public to buy food or drink, and that facilities for victims were 'questionable to poor".
A third judge, Keenan Johnson, said money spent on the temporary facility should have been used to restore the original courthouse.
Advertisement
He wrote: 'I have huge concerns that having vacated the courthouse it will now be allowed to deteriorate to such an extent that the feasibility of returning to it may be put in jeopardy.'
Judge Johnson added that they were now 'stuck with the current totally unsatisfactory situation' of having only one courtroom.
Asked about the correspondence, a spokesperson for the Courts Service said the old Roscommon courthouse had been closed by the OPW on health and safety grounds.
'Significant investment is required,' they said.
'Given the condition of the existing courthouse in Roscommon and the necessity to close it for health and safety reasons, the Courts Service took immediate steps to remedy the situation to ensure, firstly, that the health and safety of all court users was prioritised and secondly, to ensure that sittings continue to be facilitated in Roscommon Town.
'The Courts Service submission in respect of the forthcoming revised NDP [National Development Plan] includes Roscommon Courthouse.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's charm is lost on Britain, but he has won Trump's heart
You couldn't help but get the impression that Trump found opening a new golf course at least as important as running a country. I can't actually recall any past president combining the launch of his own private business venture with the office of the presidency in this fashion but there we are. It's a new world order. He did make the point in his celebratory speech that stopping a war was, after all, rather more valuable an achievement than creating a golf course so perhaps that's reassuring. What had become clear once again on this visit – which had been described as a private holiday but was, in fact, the scene of some major diplomatic developments – was that our own dear Prime Minister was far and away the US president's favourite foreign leader. We must, of course, be grateful for this fact even if we do find it totally mystifying. Sir Keir's charm may be lost on the home audience but he is the undoubted favourite of the Trump White House and this is not solely because he is the messenger for our Royal family whom the president obviously adores. No, it is the Starmer personality itself which appears to have won Trump's heart. Why? My own guess, borrowing on my recollection of American responses to various brands of foreign behaviour is that Starmer's personality represents what Americans tend to regard as quintessential Britishness: a preternatural calmness in the face of difficulties (which is to say, a face that remains expressionless at all times) and a sycophantic courtesy which somehow manages to remain dignified. We got a hint of this when Trump referred to Sir Keir's 'beautiful accent'. Perhaps the contrast with the Macron vanity and arrogance has helped too, but whatever it is, we must acknowledge that the Starmer magic has pulled off a pretty favourable result. And ironically enough, it is precisely our separateness from the European Union – which Sir Keir is trying to undo – that made this favoured position possible. Rather less happily for the Starmer government, the president offered some advice on how to pull the UK out of its spiral of decline. Stop the boats and cut taxes was the magic formula, Mr Trump suggested presumably in a spirit of helpfulness. The problem with this counsel is that both those things are almost impossible to achieve at the moment and they are, as it happens, precisely what the most threatening Opposition parties are urging. That was rather tactless and it suggests that this alliance with Trump's Right-wing Republicanism is not going to be an easy ride. But whatever it was in Starmer's approach that did it, he is currently able to influence the Trump White House at a time when global affairs are dangerously inflamed. That may or may not be an enviable position to be in. On the Middle East and Ukraine, as well as the economic future of the West, the moral responsibility of being the 'Trump whisperer' is going to be daunting.
BBC News
3 hours ago
- BBC News
Justin Kelly: New Garda Commissioner announced
The Irish Government has appointed a new Garda Commissioner who will be in term for five Kelly was appointed by the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, Jim O'Callaghan and will replace former Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) deputy chief constable Drew Harris. A three-week recruitment campaign was held by publicjobs (formerly the Public Appointments Service) in May, including an international search for suitable candidates, which resulted in 14 was appointed to his current role as Deputy Commissioner Security, Strategy and Governance in October 2024. The new commissioner will take up the role on 1 September 2025 with Commissioner Harris continuing to lead An Garda Síochána until that selection process included two interviews and a presentation by candidates as well as a detailed psychometric assessment. Harris will retire after 41 years of service to policing on the island of Ireland, including a total of seven years as Garda O'Callaghan said: "The role of Garda Commissioner is one of the most challenging and impactful leadership positions in Ireland's public service and the appointment process was suitably rigorous."O'Callaghan said he was satisfied that Kelly is both qualified and "particularly well suited" to the role.
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
Some of Britain's judges make even David Lammy look sensible on immigration
'I have never made but one prayer to God,' wrote Voltaire; 'a very short one: Oh Lord, make my enemies ridiculous. And God granted it.' One can rarely hope for more in politics. But what Voltaire neglected to mention is the darker irony; that someone may yet come along who is so jaw-droppingly awful that your enemies begin to look sane by comparison. Nobody believes Labour is effective – or even especially dedicated – to solving Britain's ever-increasing immigration problems. According to YouGov, just 11 per cent of people believe Keir Starmer's party would be best at handling asylum and immigration – an all-time low. Reform, who have only recently been added to the survey, currently stand at 36 per cent. But as untrusted as they are, Labour may yet prove to be a restraining force on the worst excesses of Britain's immigration system. Foreign Secretary David Lammy – who once told The Guardian that it was 'morally wrong to take the view that anyone making their way across the Channel is illegal' – is currently playing the part of immigration hardliner after deciding to block a family from Gaza from settling in the UK under the Ukrainian refugee scheme. Earlier this year, in news broken by The Telegraph, Judge Hugo Norton-Taylor permitted a Palestinian family of six to settle in the UK under the Ukraine Family Scheme. In January last year, the family submitted their application using the Ukraine scheme's form, arguing that it best reflected their circumstances and that their case was so 'compelling and compassionate' it warranted approval outside the scheme's formal rules. A lower-tier immigration tribunal initially rejected their claim, stating that it fell outside the scope of the Ukraine programme and that decisions about which countries qualify for resettlement schemes rest with Parliament. However, upper tribunal judge Hugo Norton-Taylor overturned that ruling, allowing the appeal and granting the family entry to the UK based on their Article 8 right to family life under the European Convention on Human Rights. Since then, Lammy's Foreign Office has denied the family the consular support they need to leave Gaza and travel to a neighbouring country, where they could apply for UK visas at an application centre. In a ruling on Monday, High Court Judge Mr. Justice Chamberlain sided with the family. He stated that the Foreign Office's June decision to withhold consular assistance was 'flawed' and 'irrational' and must be reconsidered, as the family had 'very little food and no effective sanitation' and remained 'at constant risk of injury or death'. The rulings of judges such as Chamberlain and Norton-Taylor show how detached from the British public Britain's 'lanyard class' has become – the self-congratulatory bureaucrats and elites who inhabit a liberal bubble insulated from the practical consequences of their decisions. Labour, however, are not so lucky. In such circumstances it's hard not to see the parallels with Voltaire's ridiculousness; the judiciary's positions have become so absurd that they have forced Labour to become the hardliners. As dangerous and heart-rending as the situation in Gaza is, the answer is not – as it has never been, to any humanitarian crisis – to allow huge flows of refugees into Britain. Yet the decisions of these judges seem to be setting a precedent for Palestinian refugees to enter the UK – despite there being clear and repeated indications from Government and politicians that this is not their intention. As I wrote recently, our immigration rules are collapsing under a combination of legal activism
