[vc_row full_width=”” margin_top=”0″ margin_bottom=”0″ padding_left=”0″ padding_right=”0″ animation=”” type=”” bg_color=”” bg_position=”top” bg_repeat=”no-repeat” bg_cover=”false” bg_attachment=”false” padding_top=”0″ padding_bottom=”0″ enable_parallax=”” parallax_speed=”0.1″ bg_video_src_mp4=”” bg_video_src_ogv=”” bg_video_src_webm=”” bg_type=”no_bg” parallax_style=”vcpb-default” bg_image_new=”” layer_image=”” bg_image_repeat=”repeat” bg_image_size=”cover” bg_cstm_size=”” bg_img_attach=”scroll” parallax_sense=”30″ bg_image_posiiton=”” animation_direction=”left-animation” animation_repeat=”repeat” video_url=”” video_url_2=”” u_video_url=”” video_opts=”” video_poster=”” u_start_time=”” u_stop_time=”” viewport_vdo=”” enable_controls=”” bg_override=”0″ disable_on_mobile_img_parallax=”” parallax_content=”” parallax_content_sense=”30″ fadeout_row=”” fadeout_start_effect=”30″ enable_overlay=”” overlay_color=”” overlay_pattern=”” overlay_pattern_opacity=”80″ overlay_pattern_size=”” overlay_pattern_attachment=”fixed” multi_color_overlay=”” multi_color_overlay_opacity=”60″ seperator_enable=”” seperator_type=”none_seperator” seperator_position=”top_seperator” seperator_shape_size=”40″ seperator_svg_height=”60″ seperator_shape_background=”#fff” seperator_shape_border=”none” seperator_shape_border_color=”” seperator_shape_border_width=”1″ icon_type=”no_icon” icon=”” icon_size=”32″ icon_color=”” icon_style=”none” icon_color_bg=”” icon_border_style=”” icon_color_border=”#333333″ icon_border_size=”1″ icon_border_radius=”500″ icon_border_spacing=”50″ icon_img=”” img_width=”48″ ult_hide_row=”” ult_hide_row_large_screen=”” ult_hide_row_desktop=”” ult_hide_row_tablet=”” ult_hide_row_tablet_small=”” ult_hide_row_mobile=”” ult_hide_row_mobile_large=””][vc_column width=”1\/1″][vc_column_text]9th August 2013;\u00a0 Harte Coyle Collins, Solicitors & Solicitor Advocates\u00a0today obtained leave from the High Court in Belfast to challenge a decision made by the Chief Parole Commissioner to deny a client in custody at Maghaberry prison an oral hearing. The refusal\u00a0by the Chief Parole Commissioner was made\u00a0in circumstances where additional information was available from the Probation Board which may have benefited the prisoner.\u00a0 The Chief Parole Commissioner’s decision to deny the client an oral hearing before a 3 member panel of the Parole Commissioners\u00a0interfered with the client’s liberty.<\/p>\n

The court today granted leave for a full hearing which will take place within the next 7 days.\u00a0 That hearing will consider whether the decision by the Chief Parole Commissioner to refuse an oral hearing to the client on the 29th July 2013 was fair and reasonable in circumstances where HCC Lawyers had advised the CPC that further information was available from the Probation Board for NI which may have assisted their client’s case.<\/p>\n

Chris McCann, solicitor, who heads up\u00a0the firm’s\u00a0Prison Welfare\u00a0Department\u00a0said today;<\/p>\n

“This is an important application in ensuring that prisoners’ rights are protected within the Parole Commission process.\u00a0 The High Court granted leave for this application because it deals with the fundamental rights of right\u00a0to a fair hearing\/trial and presumption in favour of\u00a0liberty.\u00a0 It is crucial that the processes\u00a0engaged by the Parole Commissioners are transparent and open to court scrutiny.\u00a0 The rationale for the existence of the Parole Commissioners scheme is to ensure that a quasi-judicial body, rather than the Executive,\u00a0 deals with these fundamental rights.\u00a0 The court today, in granting leave,\u00a0is making it clear\u00a0that these rights are at issue in this case and must be protected.”[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row]<\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Harte Coyle Collins, Solicitors & Solicitor Advocates today obtained leave from the High Court in Belfast to challenge a decision made by the Chief Parole Commissioner to deny a client in custody at Maghaberry prison an oral hearing. The refusal by te Chief Parole Commissioner was made in circumstances where additional informaiton was available from the Probation Board which may have beneffited the prisoner. The Chief Parole Commissioner’s decision to deny the client an oral hearing before a 3 member panel of the Parole Commissioners interfered with the client’s liberty.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":36109,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[80],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-36063","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-parole-commissioners","category-80","description-off"],"yoast_head":"\n