James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Mr. Murray SC to the proceedings and he also has three minutes.

Mr. Roger Murray:I thank the Chairman and members for the invitation to attend in order to share my experience as a lawyer of 25 years in terms of my interaction with the coroner service. The committee's work is of vital importance. The coroner service is an underappreciated keystone of democracy and the rule of law. The questions that the committee has addressed look at the core challenges to making a service that is fit for purpose in the 21st century.

I have represented over 100 families at mostly medical inquests located anywhere from Belfast to Cork. What strikes me most is how helpful a well-run inquest can be to healing. The converse is also true, as a badly-run inquest compounds the hurt and distress felt by a bereaved family. Poor knowledge of the law, injudicious behaviour by coroners and unopposed obstruction and, in some cases, obfuscation by medics leave deep and lasting scars.

I had the privilege of representing the families of Dhara Kivlehan and Sally Rowlette at Sligo inquests in 2014, which added to the national debate on maternal deaths. The learning that emerged from those well-handled medical inquests has undoubtedly saved lives.

In February of this year, I acted for the family of the late Shane Banks, who was a 43-year-old father of three children who died following surgery in Galway. That inquest, which was presided over by Dr. Ciarán MacLoughlin, who has since retired, heard from almost 30 witnesses over three weeks. It is the longest running medical inquest in the history of the State. No stone was left unturned by Dr. MacLoughlin and the thoroughness of his investigation is an example to others. During those three weeks, hearings were heard in the function room of a rowing club, the council chambers of Galway Country Council and, most farcically of all, the stage of the Town Hall Theatre. These are not settings that are appropriate to the gravitas of a coroner's court.

Coming here today, I took soundings from some coroners. I asked them was there any message that they wanted me to convey and their resounding reply was that proper resources are badly needed. Together with my colleague, Mr. David O'Malley, we have summarised some of the points that have been made in my submission. I shall deal with the first number of those points before handing over to my colleague, Mr. O'Malley, who will deal with the remainder.

We have summarised the conclusions contained in my submission, the first one of which concerns the qualifications or experience or both of coroners, which I know is part of the committee's bailiwick. What is the appropriate length of qualification? Should coroners be legally qualified only? Other speakers have already addressed the committee by mentioning the coroner's jury. We add our voice to those who called for a properly representative jury to be present at inquests. The number should be uneven and there should be a simple majority. We need to introduce coroners' rules in order that there are no surprises on the day of the hearing. Crucially, we should follow the example of England and Wales in having a statutory system of prevention of future death reports. There should be an obligation on coroners to identify failings and call on those who have the authority to do so to remedy those failings. Next, the prevention of future death reports should be clear, brief, focused, meaningful and designed to have practical effect.

With the permission of the Cathaoirleach, I would now like to hand over to my colleague, Mr. O'Malley.