IN/0713

No legal aid for Real IRA man

REAL IRA leader Michael McKevitt lost a legal battle yesterday for £1m from the public purse to defend a multi-million pound claim brought against him by victims of the Omagh bombing.
McKevitt (54) from Blackrock, Co Louth is being sued for SI4m along with four others suspected of carrying out the 1998 atrocity, in which 29 people and unborn twins were killed.
He was initially granted legal aid to defend the civil action in the High Court in Belfast, but it was set aside after the Legal Services Commission ruled that he had not told the truth in his application.
McKevitt claimed he was not a member of the Real IRA, which carried out the Omagh bombing, but was later convicted of membership and of directing terrorism.
He was jailed for 20 years at the Special Criminal Court in Dublin in August last year.
Last month he applied for a judicial review of the no-funding decision and his lawyers argued that it was incompatible with his right to a fair trial under the Human Rights Convention.
It was also claimed that his constitutional right was further undermined by the government's decision to give some S800,000 towards the legal costs of those bringing the case.
The court was told that the probable cost of defending the action would be £1m, and there would be further substantial costs in relation to interlocutory applications.
In a reserved judgement yesterday, Mr Justice Girvan said he was satisfied the decision to withhold legal aid was based on good reasons and was not wrong in law.
He referred to case law and said it was clear that the judge who would hear the civil claim had a vital role to play in ensuring a fair trial.
If the judge considered that it was in the interests of a fair trial that the defendant receive legal aid, he or she could give a ruling to that effect.
Mr Justice Girvan said counsel for the Legal Services Commission had stated that if the trial judge was to so indicate, then the commission would be bound to consider an application for legal aid in light of the court's view.