Ireland's attorney general recommends no criminal contempt against Burkes
Ireland’s attorney general has recommended that no criminal contempt proceedings be brought against Enoch Burke and three of his relatives “at this time”.
Rossa Fanning appeared in the High Court in Dublin to deliver his recommendation to Mr Justice Brian Cregan yesterday, who had asked the attorney general to consider such proceedings against Mr Burke, his brother Dr Isaac Burke, his sister Ammi Burke and their mother Martina Burke.
The judge had sought an opinion on a matter after the Burkes interrupted several proceedings relating to Enoch Burke’s dispute with Wilson’s Hospital School.
Mr Fanning said he had come to the “difficult decision” not to initiate such proceedings against the Burkes, having studied the judgments and transcripts in the case.
Mr Justice Cregan said his reaction was one of “disappointment” and “surprise”, adding that he would consider the attorney general’s contributions on the matter over Christmas before deciding whether he would send the matter on his own motion to the president of the High Court.
Enoch Burke, who is in prison for civil contempt relating to the dispute with the school, appeared during the proceedings via video-link.
He has been detained in Mountjoy Prison since late November for breaches of a court order directing him not to trespass at Wilson’s Hospital School in Co Westmeath, where he worked as a teacher.
He has been engaged in a legal dispute with the board of the school stemming from a request in 2022 from the then-principal that a student be addressed by a new name and pronoun.
Since then, Mr Burke has been found to have repeatedly trespassed on school property in breach of court orders.
The matter was before the High Court in Dublin yesterday for a hearing on several matters relating to the dispute.
At the outset of the hearing, Mr Justice Cregan offered Mr Burke an opportunity to give an undertaking not to trespass at the school and to purge his contempt.
Appearing on the video-link in a shirt and gilet, Mr Burke argued that he had been attending at his place of work and no injunction should have been granted against him.
He also argued that it was previous judges who had made judgments in the matter who were in contempt.
Mr Justice Cregan took it that Mr Burke was not availing of the opportunity provided to him.
Subsequently, Mr Fanning addressed the court to explain his rationale for not initiating criminal contempt proceedings against the Burkes, adding that he had “personally” given the matter “very serious consideration”.
The court also heard that the Disciplinary Appeals Panel investigating Mr Burke’s dispute with the school met on Saturday and a decision is due within 10 school days, which may be January 9 due to the Christmas holidays.
Mr Justice Cregan set a provisional date of January 14 to reconsider Mr Burke’s position in light of that decision, but the matter may be called earlier if the decision of the DAP comes before January 9.