Michael McKevitt, who is serving a 20-year sentence for membership of the Real IRA, has been given permission by the High Court to bring another legal action for early release from prison.
Mr Justice Kevin Cross gave permission for McKevitt to take a judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Justice to give him a quarter remission on his sentence instead of a third, which he believed he was entitled to.
McKevitt, who was jailed for 20 years in 2003, had taken an earlier court action against the Minister under Article 40 of the Constitution.
In that case he claimed he was entitled to one third remission of his sentence for good behaviour and participation in activities designed to prepare him for release – including courses in French, creative writing, web design, yoga and home economics.
He said he should have been released last July, instead of March 2016, the date decided on by the minister.
However, the State had argued McKevitt had shown no remorse for his crime, was refusing to disassociate himself with an illegal organisation, and saw himself as a “political hostage”.
They said the Minister was entitled to take these matters into account when making the decision on remission.
But his case was affected by a decision of the Supreme Court late last month which found an Article 40 application was not the correct procedure to deal with challenges to remission of sentences.
McKevitt's case initially came before Mr Justice Bernard Barton, who had heard his Article 40 application and adjourned it pending the Supreme Court ruling.
Mark Lynam BL for McKevitt, (59), from Beech Park, Blackrock, Co Louth, applied to have the matter struck out because of the Supreme Court ruling.
But Mr Justice Barton, who had travelled from his holidays in Scotland to attend court, said because of the public importance of the case and the public interest in it, he would deliver his judgment.
He found the decision by the Minister in refusing McKevitt’s application for one third remission was “a valid decision” and he dismissed the Article 40 application.
Asked by Mr Lynam to then consider his application for permission to apply for a judicial review of the Minister’s decision, which would take “five or 10 minutes”, Mr Justice Barton said he was “very conscious” of his public duty, which was why he came back for the case, but “what flows from this is for another day”.
“The court is going back on holiday,” Mr Justice Barton said.
The application was then taken before Mr Justice Cross where Mr Lynam argued for an early date for judicial review.
But Diarmaid McGuinness SC, for the State, said there was now “no great urgency” about the hearing as it was not being taken under Article 40.
Mr Justice Cross granted leave to take a judicial review and adjourned the case to October 8th.
