Statement by the Tánaiste on Garda Accountability
The profoundly disturbing events which are dealt with in the reports we are about to discuss have been, as they must, the subject matter of strong action on the part of the Government. The Garda Síochána Act 2005, the most profound piece of legislation relating to An Garda Síochána in the history of the State, is the vehicle which has put in place many of the changes which have drawn inspiration from the fallout from the events in Donegal.
That Act has become the catalyst for the most fundamental reform and transformation of the force into a modern police service in which we can all take pride. It goes to the very core of policing, recasting in statute form the formal relationship between the Executive, the Minister, the Oireachtas and An Garda Síochána as well as the force’s relationship with local government. It imposes a clear statutory duty on every member of the force, when required to do so by a member of higher rank, to account for his or her action or inaction while on duty. Failure to do so is sufficient to ground disciplinary action which may lead to dismissal. It must be recognised that An Garda Síochána has changed greatly in the intervening years since the events of years ago. We are in the midst of a new era of reform which will continue to impact on the way the force conducts itself and serves the community.
The Government has acted firmly and radically to ensure the culture and organisation of the Garda Síochána is fully fit for purpose. It is my firm belief that, among other steps,
· the establishment of the ombudsman commission, which is gearing up to commence operations in the new year,
· the establishment of the Garda inspectorate and the appointment of chief inspector Kathleen O’Toole and her two fellow inspectors,
· the appointment of the four-person civilian expert group chaired by Senator Maurice Hayes to advise the Commissioner on the development of management and leadership skills for senior officers, including the promotion of a culture of performance management and accountability,
· the development of human resource management and succession planning and the development of specialist skills and enhanced training for members and staff of the Garda Síochána,
· the establishment of a Garda reserve,
· the establishment of local policing committees,
· the creation of a Deputy Garda Commissioner position to lead a dedicated change management team,
· the enactment of the provisions of the Garda Síochána Act for greater accountability of members of the service,
· the new discipline regulations,
· the new promotion regulations and
· a whistleblowers’ charter
signify unprecedented reform and a new era in policing. I am determined to see these measures through and to do my utmost to ensure we never have a repeat of the appalling scenario which arose in the past and had the potential to do lasting damage to the confidence in and trust of the Garda Síochána that all our citizens deserve.
There have been calls by some Members of the House for the establishment of a police authority. Dáil Éireann is Ireland’s police authority and accountability through the Minister and the Commissioner is the most appropriate mechanism for democratic oversight of a modern police and security service.
It is my intention to consult the Opposition parties on the establishment of a security and policing committee. If the measures in the Garda Síochána Act are to have full effect, the Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights, which has a number of functions and is overloaded with other matters, is not the appropriate forum for having direct Oireachtas accountability from the Garda.
Reports from eminent persons which are critical of the Garda Síochána are not to be taken lightly. What I have said and, more important, done clearly illustrates that they have not been taken lightly. The programme of reform undertaken was recognition, even before the publication of the critical reports, that fundamental issues affecting the Garda Síochána had to be urgently addressed.
The State depends on the Garda Síochána for the protection of its citizens and its security against those who would threaten its existence. We are indebted to the vast majority of those upstanding, diligent and courageous members of the Garda who since the foundation of the State have served the Irish people with honour and distinction. We continue to condemn in the strongest possible terms the horrendous and reprehensible events of almost a decade ago.
As we take radical steps to ensure such events never recur, we should not condemn and vilify the Garda Síochána as a whole but support the organisation in its radical transformation, under Commissioner Conroy and his team, into a modern, fully accountable and transparent professional police service. I am confident that this sentiment prevails among members of the public and the Garda Síochána and that there is support for the force as it continues its unprecedented expansion through a major recruitment drive for trainee and reserve Gardaí.
I and members of the public still retain full confidence in the Garda Síochána as an organisation. Its members are in the front line in the fight against crime and deserve our full support. During my term in office and that of my predecessor, we have continuously increased the financial and human resources made available to the force. Unlike our critics in the Opposition parties who oversaw a decrease in the size of the Garda Síochána when last in office, we have increased the size of the force. I have honoured the Governments commitment and overseen the recruitment of a further 2,000 Garda trainees. The force is more than 20% larger in size than it was in 1997. Similarly, the Garda budget is more than €1.3 billion, 85% greater than in 1997. I have assured the Garda Commissioner that he will not lack resources to fight crime.
I turn now to those inquiries which have examined allegations of wrongdoing by members of the Garda Síochána. The House has an opportunity to address the issues raised in six of these reports, namely, the reports of Mr. Justice Frederick Morris on the Ardara, silver bullet and Burnfoot modules of his tribunal’s work, Mr. Justice Robert Barr concerning his tribunal’s inquiry into the fatal shooting of Mr. John Carthy, Mr. George Birmingham SC regarding his commission of investigation into the Dean Lyons case and Mr. Dermot Nally, Mr. Joseph Brosnan and Mr. Eamon Barnes in relation to the report submitted to the Minister for Foreign Affairs by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland raising concerns about the alleged activity of certain Garda officers during 1998. On behalf of the Government, I look forward to a vigorous, balanced and responsible examination of their reports over the next two days.
I do not want to avail of the time afforded to me simply to reprise all the reports’ findings. The findings of Mr. Justice Morris’s reports on the Ardara, Burnfoot and silver bullet modules have been in the public domain since late August. The Government took the unusual step last May of issuing a statement on the contents of the reports, even though publication was not permitted by the High Court at that stage owing to an impending criminal trial. That step was taken because of the serious implications of the reports’ conclusions for the force.
Detective Sergeant John White is a central figure in all three reports, notwithstanding that they all deal with separate incidents. He is also the focus of the Nally report to which I shall return later. The silver bullet module report concluded that Detective Sergeant White, with the co-operation of Garda John Nicholson, induced a member of the public, Mr. Bernard Conlon, for the promise of reward, to be “found on” Mr. Frank McBrearty’s licensed premises after hours. In this context, Mr. Conlon was paid expenses from public funds to which he was not entitled.
The Ardara report concludes that the self same Detective Sergeant White was responsible for placing an explosive device on a telecommunications mast at Ardara in Donegal so that persons suspected of arson at the site could be falsely arrested under section 30 of the Offences against the State Acts. Perhaps the most damning report of all is the Burnfoot report, which concludes that Detective Sergeant White and Detective Garda Thomas Kilcoyne deliberately planted a weapon at a campsite of the Traveller community on Friday, 22 May 1998. This was done, it is alleged, with a view to ensuring that a search which was then planned and in respect of which warrants were issued under section 29 of the Offences against the State Act 1939 for the following day, would be successful. This, in turn, would facilitate an arrest under section 30 of that Act. Further, the tribunal concluded that Detective Sergeant Conaty, Garda Mulligan and Garda Leonard entered into a conspiracy, a primary motivation being to help Detective Sergeant White to escape a criminal charge.
Two of the foregoing members, Garda Mulligan and Garda Leonard, have since been dismissed. A further member, Sergeant Conaty, is retired and Detective Sergeant White is the subject of an ongoing disciplinary process under section 14 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005.
A common theme in both the Ardara and Burnfoot reports was a shocking abuse of process by members of the Garda Síochána to make the provisions of the Offences against the State Acts available to them when making arrests. The Burnfoot report indicates that the tribunal was disturbed by the manner in which search warrants under section 29 of the Offences Against the State Act are issued by Garda superintendents. The tribunal recommended that urgent consideration be given to vesting the power to issue warrants, under section 29 of the Offences against the State Act, in judges of the District Court and Circuit Court, rather than in officers of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of superintendent, as at present. The tribunal recognised that there are very limited occasions upon which time would be so pressing as to make it impossible to follow such a procedure and that, in any event, a residual power for such eventuality could still be vested in a senior officer of the Garda Síochána to be used in exceptional circumstances.
I share fully the tribunal’s concerns about the abuse of warrants and accept the recommendation of the tribunal to the effect that statutory provisions in this regard should be considered. In light of the findings of the tribunal I did not proceed with proposals in the Criminal Justice Act, based on recommendations by an expert group on the criminal law, to extend the search warrant powers available to the Garda pending consideration of the issues raised by the tribunal.
I propose to address this issue by way of amending legislation. My intention is to propose provisions which will replace section 29 so as to define as closely as possible the exceptional circumstances in which warrants may be issued by members of the Garda Síochána. I also intend to designate a rank higher than superintendent to perform this function, place strict timescales on such warrants and introduce an effective element of oversight independent of the Garda Síochána on the operation of such warrants.
I will return to the wider implications of these Morris reports but first I will say a word about the Nally report. As I stated, there is a link between the subject matter of the Morris reports and the subject matter of the Nally report, namely, Detective Sergeant John White. On 22 March 2002, the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Mrs. Nuala O’Loan, an officer from outside the jurisdiction to whom Detective Sergeant White chose to make certain allegations, presented a report to the Minister for Foreign Affairs on the allegations in question. My predecessor then established a group under the former Secretary to the Government, Mr. Dermot Nally, including Mr. Joe Brosnan, former Secretary of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and Mr. Eamon Barnes, former Director of Public Prosecutions, to examine matters arising from that report. The group’s report came to hand in mid-2003.
This report has already been the subject of some debate in this House on two previous occasions, once in December 2003 and again in February 2004. On the latter occasion, I made a commitment to produce an edited version of the report once criminal proceedings against Detective Sergeant John White were disposed of. This commitment was given not on the basis that any public interest would be served in disseminating allegations which had been found to be baseless but in deference to the wishes of the families of the victims of the Omagh atrocity, an atrocity that marked one of the darkest days in the history of this island.
That commitment, however, was subject to the understanding that, even with the criminal proceedings being disposed of, I could not publish the report in full because of the security sensitivity of some of the information it contained. I indicated at that time that I would publish an edited version of the report in due course. The reason for this is that the subject matter of the report, to use the words of the group that prepared it, deals with highly sensitive matters involving the security of the State and possible risk to the lives of individuals. It also describes Garda operational procedures and methods, public disclosure of which could adversely affect future operations.
I believe that I have given effect to my commitment by placing copies of a heavily edited version of the report in the Oireachtas Library and making copies available to all Deputies and Senators in advance of this debate. I also gave copies in confidence to the leaders of the two main Opposition parties. My inability to give a fuller account did not sit easily with me given the gravity of the allegations made. Consequently, I hope that this edited version will be seen as a legitimate balance between the public interest in full accountability and the exigencies of the security requirements of the State.