A MAN WHO is alleged to have been part of a right-wing group that targeted a mosque in Galway and who is charged with possession of explosives says he cannot get a fair trial due to the wording of the Explosives Act.

Karolis Peckauskas (38) of Newfoundwell Road, Drogheda, Co Louth, has been granted leave from the High Court to challenge whether he can get a fair trial under the Act, which he claims contravenes his fundamental human rights.

Peckauskas was arrested on 4 November last at O’Moore Place, Portlaoise, Co Laois, and then charged with possession of six litres of hydrogen peroxide and “knowingly having in his possession an explosive substance”.

Peckauskas has not entered a plea in relation to the charge and intends to apply for bail for a third time.

In November, Peckauskas, who is a co-accused with another man, was refused bail at Portlaoise District Court and then again at the High Court in Cloverhill in December.

Co-accused Garrett Pollock, 35, with an address at Kilhorne Greene, Annalong, Co Down, was also refused bail.

At the bail hearing, Detective Garda Declan O’Connor alleged that a video recording had been made by four masked men indicating their intention to take violent action against specific targets.

A document described as a “manifesto” for a right-wing group also formed part of the evidence, the court heard.

Pollock faces a charge of possession of explosives at O’Moore Place, Portlaoise, and of possessing explosives at an address at Kilhorne Green, Co Down.

When refusing bail for both men, Judge Andrew Cody outlined the contents of the video which included four men wearing balaclavas with a tricolour behind them.

He said the video was a “practice of a statement being released subsequent to a successful terrorist attack”.

Identifying themselves as the Irish Defence Army (IDA) in the video, the group states that they accept responsibility for actions that “resulted in the destruction” of the first mosque in Ireland, located in Galway, said Judge Cody.

Papers lodged by Peskaukas’ legal team claim that the wording of Section 4 of the Explosives Act places an “impermissible burden” on the applicant.

It is submitted that the Act reads: “Any person who makes or knowingly has in his possession or under his control any explosive substance under such circumstances as to give rise to a reasonable suspicion that he is not making it or does not have it in his possession for a lawful object shall, unless he can show that he made it or had it in his possession or under his control for a lawful object, be guilty of an offence.”

The Act’s wording, lawyers for Peckauskas submit, places an “impermissible burden” on the applicant because it places an obligation on him to prove he is not morally culpable, contrary to Article 38.1 of the Constitution and the right to a fair trial under the European Convention on Human rights.

Leave for judicial review was granted to Niall Storan BL, led by Bernard Condon SC, instructed by Barry Fitzgerald Solicitors, for Peckauskas, before Justice Micheál O’Higgins on January 26, in an ex parte motion – where only one side is represented in the court. 

The matter which was before the court this week to allow time for opposition papers to be lodged appears before the High Court next month for mention.