The events of recent times, in which a young postmaster was gunned down trying to protect his business and an even younger apprentice was slain because he witnessed a gangland execution, prove . . . if proof were needed . . . that as far as organised crime is concerned, we certainly need a reality check.

The execution of Martin "Marlo" Hyland has resulted in long and detailed descriptions of his crimes, his suspected involvement in at least six murders . . . including the doorstep execution of Latvian mother Baiba Saulite.

It was, of course, supremely ironic that the gardai, who had targeted his illegal operations under Operation Oak, had warned him on 7 December that his life was under threat from a rival gang leader and even offered him protection.

If anything teaches us just how badly the courts are failing both the gardai and the wider public . . . not to mention the innocent young plumber Anthony Campbell who paid with his life . . . it is the reaction of the judiciary to Operation Oak that most needs scrutiny.

Operation Oak specifically targeted Hyland in the sort of coordinated police drive against crime that was both focused and highly professional. It was the sort of garda gang-busting operation the public wants, expects and respects. A special force involving all the garda's national units was set up to break his stranglehold on the drugs trade. They seized drugs with an estimated value of 23m, they got some firearms and they charged 24 of Hyland's associates with serious criminal offences, seriously weakening the gang boss's stature within the underworld.

But tellingly, 23 of those associates were freed on bail after application to the higher courts, even though the gardai opposed it and even though the charges related to very serious crimes.

It was this factor in the operation against Hyland that prompted Michael McDowell's Dail criticism of judges last week. He is right to be angry.

Judges cannot work in isolation and their decisions must not undermine the will of both our politicians and the general public.

Sentences against drug dealers have been increased for good reason: drug dealing now involves such huge sums of money that dealers can wield considerable power over their minions, often using violence to enforce their authority. In some parts of our cities, these dealers believe they are above the law, as we have witnessed in Dublin, in Cork and in Limerick.

The judges, however, rarely if ever give sentences that are in line with the mandatory terms legislated for by the Oireachtas. The judiciary, of course, must remain independent in order that their decisions are unimpeachable. But judges can't operate within an ivory tower, too blinded by the letter of the law to enforce it in the way it was intended when passed by our politicians who, for all their faults, represent us.

If the judges need to have a long hard look at their policy in regard to bail and serious gun and drug crimes, then the politicians and gardai must also examine carefully whether any changes are needed to our existing laws.

The minister for justice insists that resources are there to deal with gangland criminals. The gardai must ensure they get what they want. He has also pledged a full examination of our laws to ensure that the balance tips away from the criminal and towards the victim. It is only common sense.

One area that might need examination is whether we need to strengthen our witness-protection procedures. Gang leaders rule by fear and they know how hard it is for the gardai to persuade witnesses to testify in court against them. Especially in courts that allow bail so easily and hand down sentences for serious assaults that leave even the most liberal-minded scratching their heads in confusion.