Convicted drug dealer John Gilligan has secured another chance to overturn his conviction after the Court of Criminal Appeal yesterday granted Gilligan's application to refer points of law in his case to the Supreme Court.
The Court of Criminal Appeal found that two points of law arising from its decision rejecting Gilligan's appeal against conviction were of such "exceptional public importance" that they required to be determined by the Supreme Court.
The points of law relate to the circumstances under which evidence from witnesses involved in a Witness Protection Programme (WPP) is inadmissible in a criminal trial and to the nature of corroborative evidence required from accomplice witnesses who have participated in a WPP.
The appeal court said it would be up to the Supreme Court to decide whether Gilligan may raise other issues in the appeal. Mr Justice McCracken said the appeal court was expressing no view on that matter.
Gilligan is serving a 20-year sentence on charges of having cannabis resin for sale and supply. He was convicted on the drugs charges after a lengthy trial before the non-jury Special Criminal Court. He was acquitted of the murder of journalist Veronica Guerin in June 1996.
A number of persons, including Charles Bowden, Russell Warren and John Dunne, who testified against Gilligan at his trial, were placed on the WPP.
On November 12th last, the appeal court rejected an appeal by Gilligan against his conviction but it reduced from 28 to 20 years the sentence imposed on him by the Special Criminal Court.
Yesterday, in moving Gilligan's application to have points of law certified, Mr Michael O'Higgins SC argued that some five questions should be certified for ruling by the Supreme Court. He also accepted that the appeal court itself could certify questions of its own if it believed the applicant's questions were not appropriate.
Mr O'Higgins outlined his five questions. The first two questions related to the circumstances under which accomplice evidence was inadmissible in a criminal trial and arose from Gilligan's argument that evidence of former accomplices who were subsequently placed on the WPP have been deemed inadmissible.
