{"title":"Organised Crime, Anonymous Witnesses and Fair Trials in Ireland: Responding to R v Davis","authors":"L. Campbell","doi":"10.2202/1554-4567.1086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article assesses the absence of witness anonymity in Ireland, and explores the likelihood of its future adoption, using the recent decision of the House of Lords in R v Davis and the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act 2008 as a catalyst for this discussion. It examines the potential threat posed by anonymous evidence to the constitutional right to a fair trial in Ireland, and it analyses current incursions on the right to cross-examine witnesses, which have received judicial imprimatur.However, despite the lack of anonymous witness in the courts and in political and legal debate, three developments suggest that Irish policy makers may not remain averse to such a tactic: the erosion of the right to cross-examination in emergency legislation; the use of anonymous witnesses in civil proceedings; and the desire to incorporate third party interests and rights in criminal justice matters.This article concludes by considering ostensibly less problematic means of protecting intimidated witnesses and their evidence, as alternatives to anonymous evidence.","PeriodicalId":129839,"journal":{"name":"International Commentary on Evidence","volume":"CE-26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Commentary on Evidence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2202/1554-4567.1086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
This article assesses the absence of witness anonymity in Ireland, and explores the likelihood of its future adoption, using the recent decision of the House of Lords in R v Davis and the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act 2008 as a catalyst for this discussion. It examines the potential threat posed by anonymous evidence to the constitutional right to a fair trial in Ireland, and it analyses current incursions on the right to cross-examine witnesses, which have received judicial imprimatur.However, despite the lack of anonymous witness in the courts and in political and legal debate, three developments suggest that Irish policy makers may not remain averse to such a tactic: the erosion of the right to cross-examination in emergency legislation; the use of anonymous witnesses in civil proceedings; and the desire to incorporate third party interests and rights in criminal justice matters.This article concludes by considering ostensibly less problematic means of protecting intimidated witnesses and their evidence, as alternatives to anonymous evidence.
本文评估了爱尔兰证人匿名的缺失,并探讨了其未来采用的可能性,使用上议院最近在R v Davis案中的决定和2008年刑事证据(证人匿名)法案作为讨论的催化剂。它审查了匿名证据对爱尔兰宪法规定的公平审判权构成的潜在威胁,并分析了目前对证人质证权的侵犯,这些权利已得到司法许可。然而,尽管在法庭上以及在政治和法律辩论中缺乏匿名证人,但有三个事态发展表明,爱尔兰决策者可能不会继续反对这种策略:在紧急立法中侵蚀质证权;在民事诉讼中使用匿名证人;以及在刑事司法事务中纳入第三方利益和权利的愿望。本文最后考虑了表面上问题较少的保护受到恐吓的证人及其证据的方法,作为匿名证据的替代品。