Enoch Burke to remain in prison over Christmas unless contempt purged

By Cillian Sherlock, PA

Enoch Burke will remain in prison over Christmas unless he purges his contempt of court, a judge has ordered.

Mr Burke has been detained in Mountjoy Prison since late November for breaches of a court order directing him not to trespass at Wilson’s Hospital School in Co Westmeath, where he worked as a teacher.

He has been engaged in a legal dispute with the board of the school stemming from a request in 2022 from the then-principal that a student be addressed by a new name and pronoun.

Since then, Mr Burke has been found to have repeatedly trespassed on school property in breach of court orders.

He was brought before the High Court in Dublin on Wednesday for a hearing on several matters relating to the dispute.

At the outset of the hearing, Mr Justice Brian Cregan warned Mr Burke, who was accompanied by his father and one of his brothers, that if there was any interruption from any member of his family, he was going to ask them all to leave the court room as he was “not going to tolerate any further interruption”.

It came after gardai were directed to remove members of the Burke family from the court during previous sittings.

Mr Justice Cregan also told Mr Burke, who was representing himself, that he would be immediately returned to Mountjoy Prison if he strayed beyond the normal conduct of the court and that he could continue attending remotely.

The judge gave Mr Burke an opportunity to purge his contempt and give an undertaking not to trespass on the grounds of the school.

Mr Burke told Mr Justice Cregan that it was “very important” that his position was clear and that he did not accept that he was in contempt of court.

Mr Burke contends that he is in prison for his religious beliefs relating to transgenderism.

He said he had a “clear conscience” and that he respected the “laws of the land”.

The judge told Mr Burke this was “nonsense”, adding that the court “does not engage in ‘Alice in Wonderland’ language”.

He said Mr Burke had been in contempt for years and “no amount of you wishing it away” would change that.

He told him that he was in breach of a valid court order that had not been appealed.

Mr Justice Cregan said Mr Burke had a constitutional right to his religion and religious beliefs, but he had been dismissed for gross misconduct.

He said the “irony of the situation” was that if he had remained outside of the school gates he would not have been in prison for a single day.

Mr Burke maintained that the reason for his suspension was for his refusal to comply with the principal’s instruction.

The judge said there was “no doubt” that that was where the dispute started but the contempt was an entirely separate issue relating to the order not to trespass.

Mr Burke said the school should never have received that order but Mr Cregan said he had not appealed it.

Mr Burke said three-and-a-half years of time had been wasted along with taxpayers’ money.

Mr Justice Cregan told Mr Burke he was the “only one wasting taxpayers’ money” and took it that he was not going to purge his contempt, adding that this was “regrettable”.

He said he would vacate a review date for December 18 and told Mr Burke he would not be released until he purges his contempt.

“You will now be treated like every other person engaged in contempt of court and breaches of contempt of court.”

He said they do not get out at Christmas or Easter and that he did not know why Mr Burke had been “granted that preferential treatment in the past”.

He said the court may previously have believed Mr Burke would “see sense over the holidays” as he set a new review date for March 3 and reminded him that he could purge his contempt at any time.

Mr Burke said he “never asked for preferential treatment” or a “Christmas gift”, adding that he only asked for the court to be truthful and that God is not mocked.

Mr Justice Cregan said this was a “bit rich with all the lies you have told”, which Mr Burke disputed.

The court also heard applications on corrections to language used in Mr Justice Cregan’s judgment, costs and a disciplinary hearing for Mr Burke.

Mr Justice Cregan said the costs of proceedings towards the board of management “follow the event in the normal way” and that the receiver was also entitled to costs.

Meanwhile, the court heard Mr Burke intended to file an appeal to the Supreme Court to correct a Court of Appeal judgment relating to the dispute, which he said contradicted an earlier judgment from the same court.

He said he was doing this because it was relevant to an upcoming hearing of the Disciplinary Appeals Panel (DAP) relating to his employment.

Mr Burke said the DAP hearing should not proceed on the basis of two Court of Appeal judgments which came to different conclusions on why he had been disciplined by the school.

The judge provided him with a production order to file the documentation to the Supreme Court.