Member(s): Clare Daly
To discuss the fall out from the findings of the O'Higgins Commission and the controversy surrounding the current Garda Commissioner.
Member(s): Mick Wallace
Opening remarks by the Tánaiste and the Minister for Justice and Equality, Frances Fitzgerald TD
As the Deputy is aware, I published the report of the O'Higgins Commission of Investigation into certain matters relevant to the Cavan/Monaghan Division of the Garda Síochána on 11 May. The Report deserves the most careful consideration so that we can do everything possible to avoid a repeat of the issues which gave rise to the Commission in the first place. I accept its findings fully.
As I said earlier in the House, I believe our focus now should be on ensuring that victims of crime receive the level of service from An Garda Síochána they deserve. However, given the comments made by the Deputies, I want to deal with the matter of the alleged stance of the Garda Commissioner’s legal team at the Commission. But I must preface my remarks by making it clear that there are severe constraints on what I can say about this.
To do so I have to refer the House to section 11 Commissions of Investigations Act 2004. The Act contains a prohibition, with very limited exceptions, to the disclosure of any evidence given or the contents of any document produced by a witness while giving evidence in private.
Evidence was given, in private, to the Commission by 97 witnesses. Mr. Justice O'Higgins himself, in his report, referred to the confidentiality of its proceedings, saying that, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, the Commission took all necessary steps to ensure the confidentiality of its proceedings.
I will make the general point that partial disclosures of what happens in private at Commissions of Investigations are inherently unfair to those who participate in such Commissions and properly feel bound by the laws which apply to them. All 97 witnesses before the Commission have rights with regard to the confidentiality of the Commissions proceedings and I have a duty to respect those rights.
And above all, I have a duty too to respect the law. That duty is not diminished by the fact that some media reports purport to set out a small part of what may have happened at the Commission's private proceedings, notwithstanding any legal prohibitions in this regard.
I am aware of suggestions that it would not be unlawful for the Commissioner to disclose the instructions she gave to counsel as this would not involve disclosing evidence given at the Commission. Leaving aside the legal position set out in the 2004 Act, it seems to me it would be a significant change to the generally accepted position that communications between a lawyer and client should not have to be put in the public domain. To put it mildly, it would be very unusual to ask any party to a legal proceeding to unilaterally disclose its dealings with its legal representatives. In any event this would involve a partial disclosure of what happened at the commission and could serve to undermine the work of the Commission. It is hardly a demand the Deputies would make of any other party to the Commission.
For the reasons I have explained I do not believe it is appropriate for me to comment on the specific reports which have appeared in the media about what happened at the Commission.
I welcome the Garda Commissioner's clarification which last night issued where she repeated that she accepts fully the Commission's findings and, of course, that includes accepting fully what the Commission had to say about Sgt Maurice McCabe.
There is no obligation on anyone to accept the findings of Mr Justice O'Higgins. I said on publication of the report that I hoped everyone affected would accept that Mr Justice O'Higgins had fairly tried to do justice to the position of all and I believe that to be the case. But what would be very unwise and unfair would be to attempt to re-run the Commission's proceedings on the basis of allegations about what may or may have not happened at a small part of the Commission's proceedings. Suggestions that there should be some form of investigation about what happened at the Commission of Investigation seem to me to fundamentally misunderstand the nature and purpose of commissions of investigation.
As I indicated when publishing the O'Higgins report we should not lose sight of the central fact that at the heart of this report are victims who were let down. I believe our focus now should be on taking all the steps necessary to ensure that does not happen again and that we have a policing service that serves all the citizens of this country to the highest standards.
I have had preliminary discussions with the Garda Commissioner about taking forward the recommendations about policing contained in the report, and I have every confidence in her commitment to take these forward.
ENDS