Rea’s (Winston Churchill) Application
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Coghlin LJ |
| Judgment Date | 2015 |
| Neutral Citation | [2015] NICA 8 |
| Date | 27 February 2015 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Northern Ireland) |
1
Neutral Citation No: [2015] NICA 8 Ref:
COG9553
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered:
27/02/2015
(subject to editorial corrections)*
IN HER MAJESTY’S COURT OF APPEAL IN NORTHERN IRELAND
_________
Rea’s (Winston Churchill) Application [2015] NICA 8
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY WINSTON CHURCHILL REA
FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
________
Before: Coghlin LJ, Horner J and Maguire J
_________
COGHLIN LJ (delivering the judgment of the court)
[1] This is a renewed application by Winston Churchill Rea (“the applicant”) for
leave to apply for judicial review of a decision by the Director of Public Prosecutions
(“DPP”) to issue an International Letter of Request (“ILOR”) to the Central Authority
of the USA in accordance with the provisions of Section 7(5) of the Crime
(International Co-Operation) Act 2003 (“the 2003 Act”) seeking mutual assistance
from the Central Authority in respect of material held by Boston College
Massachusetts pertaining to the applicant. An initial application for leave was made
by the applicant to Treacy J based upon a number of grounds. By decision dated 9
February 2015 Treacy J dismissed the application and the applicant subsequently
made a fresh application for leave to this court. On the 10 February the applicant
sought the assistance of this court as a matter of urgency since it had been learned
that, subsequent to the hearing at first instance, PSNI officers had travelled to Boston
for the purpose of taking possession of the materials sought. For the purpose of this
application the applicant was represented by Mr Ronan Lavery QC and Mr Dornan,
Mr Peter Coll QC appeared on behalf of the DPP and Dr McGleenan QC appeared
on behalf of the notice party the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern
Ireland (“PSNI”). The court wishes to acknowledge the assistance that it derived
from well analysed and carefully prepared oral and written submissions advanced
by all counsel. After hearing some detailed initial argument this court granted leave
to the applicant in relation to the sole ground considered by this court to be
arguable, namely:
“That on a proper interpretation of Section 7(5) of the 2003 Act there is a requirement
to demonstrate the relevance of the requested material.”
2
The applicant was given leave to file an amended Statement of Grounds and the
respondent was given leave to file an affidavit from Mr Burnside. The applicant
lodged a Notice of Incompatibility and, having regard to the urgency of the matter,
the application then proceeded as a rolled up hearing by way of appeal.
Background facts
[2] It appears that the applicant, together with a number of other individuals,
took part in a series of interviews to be known as the “Belfast Project”. The Belfast
Project has been described as an oral history having as its goal the documentation of
recollections of members of the Provisional Irish Republic Army, Provisional Sinn
Fein, the Ulster Volunteer Force and other paramilitary and political organisations
active during the “Troubles” period of history from 1961 onwards. Oral testimony
from the participants was recorded by way of voice recordings which were
subsequently transmitted to Boston College Massachusetts in the United States of
America. The interview materials were kept within the secure confines of the John J
Burns Library of Rare Books and Special Collections at Boston College.
[3] In an affidavit sworn on 15 January 2015 the applicant confirmed that in or
around June 2005 he was interviewed for the purposes of the Belfast Project and his
testimony was provided to a researcher by way of a voice recording. At paragraph 5
of the said affidavit the applicant made the following assertions:
“My clear understanding was that my testimony was
recorded, conveyed, and deposited at the
Burns Library, Boston College under the strictest
conditions of confidentiality and would be retained
there under the same duty of confidentiality which
Boston College had promised me in return for my
testimony. I gifted the contents of my recordings to
Boston College for preservation and access to my
testimony was to be restricted until after my death
unless I provided prior written authority for their use,
which authority has never been provided.”
[4] Mr Wilson McArthur, one of the researchers and interviewers for the Belfast
Project has sworn an affidavit herein confirming that the participants agreed to
transfer possession of the interview recordings and transcripts to Boston College
and that the agreements contained the following clause:
“Access to the tapes and transcripts shall be restricted
until after my death except in those cases where I
have provided prior written approval for their use
following consultation with the Burns Librarian,
Boston College. Due to the sensitivity of content, the
ultimate power of release shall rest with me. After
To continue reading
Request your trial
4 cases
-
R (Unaenergy Group Holding Pte Ltd and Others) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office
...and for completeness, it remains to deal with the decision of the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal, Re Application by Winston Churchill Rea For Leave to Apply for Judicial Review [2015] NICA 8. Mr Keith relied upon this decision for the proposition that, in order to read CICA compatibly wi......
-
R v Francis Lanigan
...co-operation. This is made clear by the Home Office guidelines on Mutual Legal Assistance; see also Rea’s Application for Judicial Review [2015] NICA 8 at paragraph [7]. (ii) The appropriate mechanism to be used to obtain evidence from overseas usually depends on the type of assistance bein......
-
McIntyre's (Anthony) Application
...to prosecutors seeking international assistance. No such guidelines have been issued in this jurisdiction. In Re Rea’s Application [2015] NICA 8 this court dealt with an application for judicial 9 review in respect of a decision by the PPS to issue an ILOR to the Central Authority of the US......
-
Summary of judgment - Boston Tapes Application Dismissed
...state is subject1. The core of the applicant’s complaint in this case was that there had been a breach of 1 Re Rea’s Application [2015] NICA 8 and R (Hafner) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court [2009] 1 WLR 1005 Judicial Communications Office 4 the duty of good faith and that a duty of......