Barra McGrory has defended his position as head of the prosecution service amid criticism from sections of unionism that he is compromised because of his former role as solicitor to a number of high profile figures including Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams.
The collapse of the Maria Cahill abuse case and the withdrawal of the sisters of Robert McCartney as witnesses in the prosecution of veteran republicans Padraic Wilson and Sean Hughes prompted allegations from members of the DUP, including former health minister Edwin Poots, that the director's role had been compromised.
Mr McGrory had excused himself from the Cahill case because of a conflict of interest, and last month accepted the critical findings of a review by Sir Keir Starmer that highlighted significant failings by the PPS. The director as a result apologised to three victims in the case.
In relation to his former role as a defence solicitor Mr McGrory said: "Actually it's not a big a problem as some people think, I wish I'd as a big a practice when I was in private practice as people seem to think I had.
"In three and a half years I've excused myself from a total of six cases, some of them overlapping out of thousands and thousands.
"I've a very large body of very able lawyers here if there might be the occasional case I can't make a personal decision on, but then I don't take personal decisions in every case anyway.
"It's only the particularly complicated or difficult ones that are brought to me personally or of very high public interest.
"A lot of my role is policy direction and strategic oversight, some people read more into it than is necessary.
"It's only been politicised by some, very few people and that's all I'll say. I don't hear too many complaints about me from the generality of the body politic.
"I am able to bring a richness and diverseness of experience to the role and that is better for the PPS and worth the occasional conflict of interest when it does arise and can be easily dealt with".
In defence of his office handling of the McCartney prosecution, collapsing as it did so soon after the Cahill case, Mr McGrory said that despite an overlap in the accused the two "were very different cases".
"The McCartneys' grievances are that they wanted us to charge the accused with different charges. They also had issues with another individual who they wanted called as a witness ... charged with withholding information.
"We had very good reasons for not going down those avenues and they were told at the time that we can't explain any further because they were witnesses in the case, they were 'the' witnesses but we would explain when it was concluded."
Mr McGrory said all those involved in putting the case together were disappointed when the sisters withdrew their evidence, believing that they had a strong case for prosecution.
"We were absolutely willing to carry on with the case we considered that the test for prosecution had been met in respect to the charges that were brought. We had our reasons for taking those charges. And the office was disappointed, those who were dealing with the case were disappointed, but that is their choice and that is their right," he added.
And Mr McGrory said despite recent political pressure he intends to remain in post for at least the next 18 months while restructuring of the office takes place. He would not be drawn on speculation that he has ambitions to become a High Court judge.
"At least for the foreseeable future I've made a commitment to the staff to see through these changes, after that who knows", he said.
"I've ambition to continue to work in the field of criminal justice," he added.
