GSOC’s handling of affair reveals impaired judgment

Opinion: We should have been told about all of this months ago

GSOC commissioner Simon O’Brien photographed arriving for the Public Service Oversight Committee meeting at the Oireachtas in Leinster House in February. Photograph: Brenda Fitzsimons

GSOC commissioner Simon O’Brien photographed arriving for the Public Service Oversight Committee meeting at the Oireachtas in Leinster House in February. Photograph: Brenda Fitzsimons

Sat, Feb 15, 2014, 00:01

Imagine if the Court Services suspected that a jury room or a judge’s chambers in the criminal courts building had been bugged.

Imagine if they had hired a UK- based security consultancy to conduct a sweep of the building and tests of the integrity of its telecommunications and that these revealed three different “technical and electronic anomalies” which “could not be conclusively explained; and which “raised concerns” about the integrity of jury and judicial deliberations.

Imagine then, if in possession of this information the board of the services, which as it happens is chaired by the Chief Justice, decided not only not to tell the Department of Justice but not to reveal publicly that all this had happened. Imagine if they had decided that this suspicion of surveillance at the heart of our criminal justice system should never become political or public knowledge.

That is the equivalent of what the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) did late last year. They suspected they were under surveillance and commissioned a sweep of their offices and telecoms. On the basis of the consultants’ findings they started inquiries focused on a suspicion of Garda involvement.

They told no one about the fact that the confidentiality which both complaints to GSOC and members of An Garda Síochána were entitled to might have been compromised. Instead, last December , the ombudsman commission made a “strategic decision” that public confidence in GSOC and its work would be better safeguarded by not making any of this public. They also, somewhat naively, presumed these matters would not leak.


Alleged Garda misbehaviour
Querying how

the Garda watchdog handled this matter is not, as some have suggested, turning them from victim into villain. It is simply appropriate questioning of their judgment as commissioners. Whether there was any substantial basis for their original suspicion, whether they acted appropriately in launching a public interest inquiry and whether they were correct in their decision not to make these matters public are all proper issues for political and public oversight.

The bulk of GSOC’s work arises from complaints made by the public about alleged Garda misbehaviour. However, GSOC, unlike many watchdog-type agencies, has been given the power to initiate its own investigations where it decides this is in the public interest.

These own initiative public-interest inquiries are, as you would expect, rare and in most, if not all, other instances the ombudsman commission has made a point of announcing that they have launched such an inquiry, of keeping the public informed of the time scale for progress in these investigations and of publishing the findings.

We reserve the right to remove any content at any time from this Community, including without limitation if it violates the Community Standards. We ask that you report content that you in good faith believe violates the above rules by clicking the Flag link next to the offending comment or by filling out this form. New comments are only accepted for 3 days from the date of publication.

Irish Times News



News - direct to your inbox

Which Daily Digest would you like?