A judge has adjourned a trial involving three protesters accused of approaching a plane at Shannon Airport in Co Clare due to a lack of clarity around the defence of “necessity”.
Áine Ní Threinír (33), of Cuirt na Tra, Salthill, Galway; Aindriú de Buitléir (28), of Tír na nÓg, Bóthar an Tismeáin, An Cheathrú Rua, Gaillimh; and Eimear Walshe (33), of Fernhill, North Circular Road, Limerick, were arrested over a protest against US military use of the Co Clare airport in March 2024.
They were due to appear before Clare Circuit Court charged with trespassing, under Section 11 of the Public Order Act, and interfering with the operation, management and security of an airport, under Section 47 of the Air Navigation and Transport Act 1998.
If convicted, they could face a fine of up to €250,000 and imprisonment of up to two years.
READ MORE
As their trial was set to begin at Ennis Courthouse on Tuesday, Aisling Casey, State Solicitor for Co Clare, brought a separate case involving a protest at the airport to the court’s attention.
The accused in that case, Dan Dowling, was found guilty of trespass at the airport in 2017 and was ordered to pay €5,000 to a local women’s refuge.
A fellow peace activist, Edward Horgan, was also found guilty of trespassing. Both men were acquitted of criminal damage charges.
While Horgan accepted the decision, Dowling appealed his verdict. His case is delayed while the Supreme Court determines what constitutes a defence of necessity, particularly in relation to an act of protest.
Casey said she anticipated that the defence of necessity would come up as an issue in Tuesday’s trial.
She said the Supreme Court is “keen to provide clarity on that common law defence” and suggested that Tuesday’s proceedings may need to be adjourned until it reaches a decision.
Judge Francis Comerford agreed, saying “it’s not fair to ask a jury to deliberate on something if the law is unsatisfactory”.
“Ultimately, I’d be asking the jury then to decide the case on the basis of law that might not be the correct law,” he said.
There is no immediate time frame for the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Dowling case. It is likely that cases of a similar nature could be put on pause while there is ambiguity in the law.
