Sir, - You report (June 19th) states that retired High Court Judge Rory O'Hanlon, is to be paid a sum "believed to be in excess of £100,000" in settlement of his action against the State over his removal as President of the Law Reform Commission.
The taxpayers will, of course, have to pay the sum involved. Your report makes no mention of costs. In addition to those of counsel etc on either side, costs also arise in the Attorney General's and Chief State Solicitor's Offices. The taxpayers will have to pay these, too.
One effect of settling outside is, that whatever is on the files in this case is not revealed to the High Court. Thus, the taxpayers are kept in the dark. So much for transparency and freedom of information.
The action and settlement would indicate that an act of some incompetence or, at best, of misplaced enthusiasm for views opposed to those of Mr O'Hanlon, was made in removing him. The Government, last week, is "happy to acknowledge" the "great esteem" in which he "is universally held" and that he is one with "distinguished service in high judicial office". As Judge O'Hanlon had those attributes in 1992, when he left, it is by implication acknowledged that some person or persons are guilty of serious waste of public funds in removing this.
The financial activities of politicians, their parties and some banks are now being investigated and widely exposed. Should the basic considerations and the financial consequences of the removal of Mr O'Hanlon not be similarly examined? Incidentally, the tenets of Government accounting provide that persons responsible for wasteful expenditure may be surcharged. I wouldn't hold my breath. - Yours, etc., T. J. O'Reilly,
Greystones,
Co Wicklow.