Shatter’s case takes a bashing in the High Court

Alan Shatter's claims about the Guerin report have taken a comprehensive bashing by the High Court. In his excoriating 71-page judgment, Mr Justice Seamus Noonan dismisses each and every one of the former minister's grounds, vindicating the barrister Seán Guerin and his approach to the review that led to Shatter's resignation.

The judge’s conclusions are all one way, and his language is unsparing. Shatter’s propositions are “untenable”, “hardly credible”, “somewhat curious”, “totally unwarranted” and “extraordinary”.

The judge finds it “very difficult to resist” the conclusion that Shatter took the case as a tactical “collateral attack” aimed at preventing his role in the Garda whistleblower saga being examined by a commission of investigation set up in line with the Guerin report’s recommendations.

‘Unacceptable’ approach

He takes issue with Shatter’s “entirely unacceptable” approach to his claim that Guerin’s actions had given rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.

Shatter withdrew these claims “somewhat grudgingly”, the judge says, but that anyone could make “such a serious allegation without even the most basic attempt to verify the facts is a matter of significant concern.”

Shatter had argued that Guerin should have interviewed him before writing his report, and pointed out that the terms of reference left it open to Guerin to interview Garda whistleblower Sgt Maurice McCabe.

Again, the judge gave Shatter short shrift, saying that Guerin was entitled to interpret his terms of reference in the way that he did.

Overall, the judge concluded, the “preliminary nature” of the Guerin report did not attract the requirements of natural justice, but even if it did, “there was in fact no denial of fair procedures to [Shatter].”

Asides

Mr Justice Noonan’s analysis offers some intriguing general asides. For example, he asserts that “I cannot see how the applicant [Shatter], as a member of the Government that decided to obtain and publish the report, can complain of the consequences.”

Why not? Leaving aside the facts of this case, why would the act of commissioning a report preclude someone from complaining about how it is ultimately carried out?

Shatter has not said whether he will appeal. In the short term, however, the judgment is unlikely to have far-reaching consequences. It won't have any effect on the work being done by the commission of investigation chaired by Mr Justice Nial Fennelly.

That commission, which is looking into the secret taping of phone calls at Garda stations and the circumstances in which former Garda commissioner Martin Callinan resigned, has said it will be in a position to circulate a draft report on Callinan's resignation at the end of the month. The Government is expected to publish it in June.