Just two of 12 rape cases listed to start at the Central Criminal Court on Monday were able to go ahead because of the intensifying dispute over solicitors’ fees.Social Democrats leader Holly Cairns described the situation as “an absolute disaster” because of reforms introduced by Minister for Justice Jim O’Callaghan to the legal aid system, warning that “thousands of cases” are not being heard and ultimately many victims “will not get justice”.Raising the issue in the Dáil she said the two trials that started went ahead because the defendants were minors and “solicitors have not withdrawn their services cases involving children”. Cairns also referred to reports of a man being charged with murder without having access to legal advice during Garda questioning. She said: “We should all be aware that being unable to access legal advice in Garda stations could pose very serious problems in subsequent criminal trials.”Minister for Public Enterprise Jack Chambers staunchly defended the reforms which came into effect on July 1st. They involve an 8 per cent increase in criminal legal aid fees payable to solicitors in the circuit and higher courts, with a once-off €520 fee for District Court criminal cases, the current payment for five appearances plus an 8 per cent increase.He said the “weighted average of appearances” is five and many “often require fewer appearances for conclusion”. They aimed to “make the system more effective and efficient” and ensure the accused are provided with legal representation to which they are “constitutionally entitled”.Chambers stressed while criminal case volumes in the District Court had decreased, expenditure rose from €19 million in 2015 to more than €41 million in 2025.“Every Minister across Government must examine reform and no area of expenditure should be immune,” he said.[ Solicitors walk out of courtrooms in protest over flat-fee changesOpens in new window ]However, the Social Democrats TD accused O’Callaghan of failing to “meaningfully engage” with solicitors “preferring instead to just portray them as abusing the system and being unethical”. She claimed there was “not a shred of evidence” for O’Callaghan’s apparent belief that criminal legal aid solicitors are “gaming the system and trying to line their pockets by prolonging criminal cases”. His own internal review does not know why the adjournments are sought when ordinarily the majority of such requests are “by the State because of some delay on the prosecution side”.Cairns added it was judges who granted adjournments. “So, does the Minister seriously think judges are conspiring with solicitors to delay cases, so solicitors can make more money? Because that seems to be the implication.” But the Minister said the Department of Justice reviewed more than 350,000 District Court cases between 2022 and 2023 and “developed reform proposals in that regard”.He insisted the system was reformed to “improve efficiencies, reduce unnecessary adjournments, simplify the administration of criminal legal aid, speed up case resolution and enable faster payments to practitioners under the new system”.The set fee “will be payable to solicitors, replacing the previous appearance-based sliding scale, and the review that was undertaken showed that cases with criminal legal aid take an average of 313 calendar days to complete, compared to 133 days for cases without”. And he said “the weighted average appearances for cases with criminal legal aid is five, while the weighted average for appearances without criminal legal aid is just over three”.But Cairns said while the Minister for Justice’s review looked at 350,000 cases “he’s repeatedly citing three cases and three in 350,000 doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny”.There was “no mechanism for recording the reason for adjournments”.Chambers said: “We all want to see a system that works, that’s victim-focused”. But they needed a system with “sustainability of expenditure”. And the increased costs despite fewer cases “has to raise legitimate questions from a Government that wants to drive reform”.