[Article] Contract signed for Dublin court complex

Victor

While I can understand some of the security reasons for this, I dislike the way people will be able to draw implications from people's presence in a particular court building.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0418/courts.html

Contract signed for Dublin court complex
Wednesday, 18 April 2007 17:24

The Courts Service has signed the contract for a new Dublin Criminal Court Complex.

The new 22 courtroom building to be located near the Phoenix Park will incorporate all the criminal business of the Dublin courts into a single central complex.

It will be built as a public private partnership with Babcock & Brown.

AdvertisementThe Courts Service says the Four Courts will then be redeveloped as a civil courts complex.

The Minister for Justice, Michael McDowell, has welcomed the announcement.

He said the construction of the new complex is due to start in the summer, and it is due to be completed in 2009.

Tom Young

So the owners of eircom strike again (babcock and brown).

I wonder will the Criminal Practice delineation mean that another Law Library is built or installed for those who's practices are more Criminal in nature, thus leaving the current courts and library free for Civil/Commercial matters. One ponders.

irlrobins

Victor wrote:

While I can understand some of the security reasons for this, I dislike the way people will be able to draw implications from people's presence in a particular court building

I think the fact that they're in cuffs being led from a prison van into the building is often the bigger giveaway.

New building is badly needed, as anyone who has been in the AUD building can see.

Victor

irlrobins wrote:

I think the fact that they're in cuffs being led from a prison van into the building is often the bigger giveaway.

I'm thinking for witnesses and families.

irlrobins

WEll i still think the same implications could be derived regardless of setting if people were that way inclined.

johnnyskeleton

irlrobins wrote:

I think the fact that they're in cuffs being led from a prison van into the building is often the bigger giveaway.

Victor wrote:

While I can understand some of the security reasons for this, I dislike the way people will be able to draw implications from people's presence in a particular court building.

They can do this already to a certain extent, insofar as some courtrooms are usually used as criminal courtrooms - and let’s not forget the special criminal courts (it's pretty obvious why you're there, but then again, some of the SCC's more frequent customers might be proud of the large army presence that they draw).

If I take your point correctly, you envisage a person going to the new criminal courts and being spotted by a friend or neighbour (thus being found out as a criminal). I think that if you are seen going to the four courts at present, people often will think the worst of you anyway. Or, if they do see you on the way to your trial in the new building, you can always lie and say that you're a witness.

I don't see why there can't be a new civil courts complex and leave the criminal trials in the four courts. Not to put too fine a point on it, but while I do think the four courts is a beautiful building, it's a bit shabby after the guts of 2 centuries and a civil war. My view is that civil law has a modern, professional feel to it and so would seem natural in a fancy new building, and the solemn, aged feel of the four courts seems appropriate for criminal law.

Above all, I think there is a dire need for more judges, and 22 new criminal courtrooms will not make much difference unless there are 22 new courts.

Tom Young wrote:

I wonder will the Criminal Practice delineation mean that another Law Library is built or installed for those who's practices are more Criminal in nature, thus leaving the current courts and library free for Civil/Commercial matters. One ponders.

I would imagine so, at the very least the bar council should get involved in the new courthouse's construction (I mean financially). I imagine that this would be a very divisive issue, and not just geographically. On the one hand, it would split the law library which would undoubtedly change the nature of the profession, and there might come a time when a barrister must choose to be a criminal or a civil barrister, but not both. At the same time, if young barristers are waiting many years for a seat in the current library, having more room for them sounds like a good thing.

johnnyskeleton

Victor wrote:

I'm thinking for witnesses and families.

I suppose also too for jury members, court staff. Given that if there are 22 courts there can't be that many accused going there, and perhaps all the other people going in and out of there, it wouldn't make that much difference.

That said, there are separate family law courts and I suppose the same thing could be said about them.