Private Members Business Dail Eireann Garda Síochána (Amendment Bill) 2013 Speech by Kathleen Lynch, T.D. Minister for State at the Department of Justice and Equality Wednesday 17th July, 2013A Cathaoirleach, thank you.
We have had an interesting debate on this topic over the last two days. .
To conclude, while not wanting to recap on all the issues raised by the
Minister, the model proposed in the Bill does not have due regard to the
existence of a national police force in this jurisdiction which is not only
the police service but also the security and intelligence service, as well
as the border control authority of the State. In his opposition to the
Bill, the Minister voiced his concerns that the proposal to transfer key
oversight functions of the Garda Síochána to a separate unelected body
would not improve the democratic accountability of the Force. It is the
fact that the Garda Síochána Act 2005 provides that the Garda Commissioner
is accountable to the Minister for the performance of his functions and
those of the Force and the Minister in turn is accountable to this House.
The Commissioner, as Accounting Officer for the Force, is also liable to
appear before the Public Accounts Committee. It is noteworthy that
experience in the UK for example is moving away from the type of structure
proposed in the Bill to systems aimed at more democratic accountability
linked to elected representatives, in tandem of course, with an independent
body to investigate allegations of misconduct.
The Bill also calls for enhanced Garda measures on human rights. It is
indeed appropriate that we debate Garda responsibilities on human rights
and the policies developed to meet these. There have been a number of
developments within An Garda Síochána in recent years designed to put
regard for human rights at the core of policing in Ireland. One of the
functions of the Garda Síochána, under section 7 of the 2005 Act, is to
vindicate the human rights of each individual. Arising from this
requirement, all Garda policy is drafted in accordance with Human Rights
Principles and all operational Garda Directives now make reference to the
relevant human rights principles. Accordingly, the application of human
rights is a core objective of the Force. This work is supported by advice
from the Strategic Human Rights Committee of the Garda Síochána whose
membership includes NGO experts in human rights.
The Bill seeks an enhanced role for the Joint Policing Committees. A
number of Deputies brought their own personal and positive experience of
working with these Committees to the fore in the debate on the Bill. The
Minister awaits the outcome of the review of the JPCs which is underway and
I expect that we can look forward to improved operating guidelines for
their work providing, in particular, for an enhanced communication role at
both local and national levels.
In presenting the Bill, some Deputies referred to whistlebolowing
provisions for members of the Garda Síochána. As you will be aware, the
Programme for Government contains a commitment to enhance whistlebolowing
provisions. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform recently
published the Protected Disclosures Bill 2013 which provides for robust
protection to whistleblowing employees generally, across both the public
and private sectors. Section 19 of that Bill provides for the making of
regulations relating to protected disclosures by members of the Garda
Síochána. This provision will provide the availability of enhanced
procedures to members of the Garda Síochána who wish to raise matters of
concern.
I would like to comment on two issues in the Bill. Firstly, a number of
Deputies commented that certain forms of harm, including torture and rape,
were not covered under section 102 of the 2005 Act. Section 102 requires
the Garda Commissioner to refer to the Ombudsman Commission ‘any matter’
where it appears that the behaviour of a member ‘may have resulted in the
death of, or serious harm to, a person’ and ‘serious harm’ is
comprehensively defined. But it is important to understand that this is a
neutral, automatic referral mechanism. In other words, the Commissioner
does not have to decide whether any wrongdoing might be involved. So, for
example, a death arising from a straightforward car accident would be
covered under this provision. The scenarios outlined by some Deputies,
concerning incidents of torture or rape, are of an entirely different order
and would fall to be investigated as serious criminal allegations. In this
regard, the other provisions of the Act relating to the Ombudsman
Commission would be relevant.
Secondly, the Bill is seeking the extension of the time limit for making
complaints to the Ombudsman Commission from six months to one year. Section
84(2) of the 2005 Act already provides that the Ombudsman Commission may
extend the time limit if it considers there are good reasons for so doing,
but clearly for practical reasons including the public interest in
investigating incidents as soon as possible there must be a reasonable
time-frame within which to make a complaint. It is also the case that
proposals from the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission for amendments to
part 4 of the 2005 Act are under consideration and these proposals are the
starting point for any revision to their oversight role.
To conclude, I would like to thank Deputies for their contributions to the
debate on the Bill. I fully agree with the Minister’s acknowledgement
yesterday of the genuine objectives behind the Bill, but conclude that the
Bill cannot, for the reasons stated during the debate, be supported.
Thank you, a Cathaoirleach.