The evidence file of a former Garda superintendent dismissed in 1928 has been released by the Department of Justice and is set to reach him in New York, a month before his 100th birthday. For more than 70 years, Mr William Geary has campaigned for his case to be reopened, or at least to be told what evidence there was which led to his dismissal from the Garda Siochana in June 1928.
A week ago, his story was told in The Irish Times. Following a request by Mr Geary's family, made under the Freedom of Information Act, and inquiries from The Irish Times, the Taoiseach's office disclosed any information it had and said the Department of Justice was being asked to review Mr Geary's request on humanitarian grounds.
Yesterday, the file in the Department was dispatched to Mr Geary by registered post. When he receives it, he will for the first time see for himself the evidence which led to his dismissal for allegedly taking a £100 bribe from the IRA. Hotly denying the accusation and denied a trial or disciplinary hearing, Mr Geary emigrated in disgrace to New York.
The Government's release of the file on humanitarian grounds, rather than under the FOI Act, has called into question the definition by government officials of "personal" and "personnel" files. On September 1st last year, Mr Geary's godson, Mr John Collins, requested access to the file. Two weeks later, the Government responded that the Act "came into effect in Ireland as and from 21 April, 1998. Records created prior to that date are specifically excluded from the scope of the Act" and that consequently the request could not be dealt with under the Act. There was agreement, however, that the records should be released on humanitarian grounds.
However, under Act, personal files are exempt from the April 21st, 1998, date and may be viewed regardless of their creation date. Personnel files of those no longer employed by a public body are also fully retrospective.
When asked why the Geary file did not come within the scope of the Act, Ms Fidelma Rogers of the Freedom of Information Unit in the Department of the Taoiseach said "because the files come before April 21st, 1998".
When reminded that this did not apply to personal files or to the personnel files of those no longer employed by a government department, she said she was not the key decision-maker in the case but that she would make further inquires. Yesterday, she reaffirmed the interpretation of the Act.
Ms Marie McGonagle, lecturer in media law at NUI Galway, said of the Government's response: "If the record should be available within the scope of the Act, it should be available as a right, not as a government-granted privilege."