“It’s up to the prosecution to make the case why it should no longer exist.”

The BBC have an interesting update on the reporting restrictions, specifically court orders prohibiting the media from reporting either the identities or addresses of the defendants, in the case of “three men and two women – some of them senior republicans – who are accused of PIRA activity”.  From the BBC report

All five are charged with belonging to a proscribed organisation on dates stretching back to 1999.

Four of them are accused of arranging, addressing or assisting in the management of a PIRA meeting on named dates in 2000.

The two women and one of the men are also alleged to have used threats or menaces to get another woman to co-operate with an inquiry into claims she made against an IRA volunteer.

Earlier this month a judge at Belfast Magistrates’ Court imposed a ban on publishing the names of the five defendants.

The prohibition was put in place to protect the identity of the alleged victim.

However, at a further procedural hearing on Thursday it was revealed that she no longer wants the reporting restrictions.

As the woman sat in the public gallery, a Public Prosecution Service (PPS) lawyer said: “She has asked for that to be lifted. I’m to make that application today.”

The lawyer for one of the accused objected, and the BBC reports that

Judge Bates said he was not prepared to lift the restrictions at this stage.

Adjourning the case for three weeks, he directed the PPS to put reasons for lifting the ban in writing before the next hearing.

The judge added: “It’s up to the prosecution to make the case why it should no longer exist.”

As before, needless to say, no attempts at breaching those court orders will be tolerated here.

Pete Baker