The Chief State Solicitor's report on the Sheedy affair has acknowledged "human error" in his office's handling of it, but says this must be judged against the "extraordinary manner" in which the case was dealt with.
Mr Michael A. Buckley concludes that he is not convinced that fundamental changes in procedure are necessary, "having regard to the extraordinary manner in which this case was dealt with, both in the manner in which it was listed and the way in which it was heard without inviting one side to make an application and the other side to reply".
His report says a State solicitor was temporarily out of the courtroom when Judge Cyril Kelly called the Sheedy case out of turn.
Ms Eileen Creedon, senior assistant solicitor at the CSS Office, was probably taking a telephone call at the time the case was called, a quite common circumstance for solicitors in her position.
But noting that human error can occur in any organisation, the report adds that a legal clerk who was in the courtroom throughout did not inform Ms Creedon about the matter when she returned.
Mr Buckley goes on: "Having regard to the fact that, to the best of my knowledge, no incident of this sort has ever transpired before in court, I am not convinced that it is necessary to make fundamental changes in relation to the procedures which are followed in the court by my staff."
He adds, however, that he has begun discussions with the Director of Public Prosecutions on how reporting arrangements might be improved. He had also taken steps to tighten up procedures in his office. These included an arrangement whereby the solicitor in charge of the trials section would in future review cases on the court list before close of business on the day cases were heard.
The seven-page report notes that there is nothing in the transcript of the hearing on November 12th last to explain why Judge Kelly called the Sheedy case early, at No 9 list rather than as listed at No 19.
It also notes that the first and only indication to the CSS that the case was listed came on the day before, November 11th, 1998, when the Circuit Court office faxed the November 12th list for Court No 24.
"An erroneous impression has been formed in some quarters that the office had four days' notice of the case. This impression appears to have arisen due to a mistake in an Irish Times report on 30th March 1999, which wrongly stated that notice was received on 8th November. The date of hearing was also wrongly reported as 9th November instead of 12th November."
In his conclusions, Mr Buckley complains of "a lack of clarity in court listing and notification procedures in criminal cases".
Although his report does not deal with the alleged discussions in chambers before sentencing, on the grounds that these may be relevant to ongoing proceedings brought by Sheedy, it does include a copy of a June 1998 circular to all State solicitors, instructing them not to engage in "plea-bargaining".
