Sheedy Affair Rumbles On

The Sheedy case has done serious damage to public confidence in the impartial administration of justice in this State and caused…

The Sheedy case has done serious damage to public confidence in the impartial administration of justice in this State and caused the resignation of three senior law officers, including two judges. A more recent failure by the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, to disclose representations he made on behalf of Mr Philip Sheedy to the Dail, has damaged trust between the Government parties and added detail to a worrying pattern of political and judicial involvement in the case.

The Taoiseach's insistence that he did nothing wrong in making representations about whether Mr Sheedy could be offered regular day-releases from prison to participate in a FAS course is accepted by the Opposition parties. But they fault Mr Ahern's unwillingness to make the matter public, especially in light of the forced resignations of Mr Justice Hugh O'Flaherty, Mr Justice Cyril Kelly and Mr Michael Quinlan and the repeated requests from the Tanaiste, Ms Mary Harney, that he should do so. Furthermore, they suggest that private secretary to private secretary contact between the Department of the Taoiseach and the Department of Justice lifts the case above run-of-the-mill political representations and gives it special status.

There are many loose ends in this affair, with conflicts of evidence between judges; faulty memories amongst the participants and a general reluctance to get to grips with dangerous or politically unsettling issues. Questions as to why things happened in the way they did, have yet to be satisfactorily answered. The Taoiseach initially explained his failure to advise the Dail about the Sheedy representations on the basis that TDs would have "gone ballistic" had he done so.

The Minister for Justice, Mr John O'Donoghue, rationalised his silence on the grounds that publicity would have provided grist to the mill of conspiracy theorists. These were not the responses of people anxious to shine light into dark corners. And they sit uneasily with the Cabinet's decision to encourage the three law officers to make full statements of their involvement and motivation to an Oireachtas committee by delaying payment of promised pensions.

READ MORE

Ms Harney's dismay over the failure of the Taoiseach to advise the Dail of his involvement in the case is understandable. And when Mr Ahern publicly challenged the Tanaiste's assertion that he had given such an undertaking, she was furious. Yesterday's events, involving an emergency meeting of the Progressive Democrats; cancellation of a Cabinet meeting and intensive, indirect negotiations between the Taoiseach and Tanaiste resulted in Mr Ahern "clarifying" his position. He accepted he had been at fault for not informing the Dail and he expressed his regrets, personally, to the Tanaiste.

Later today, the Taoiseach will make a formal Dail statement on the issue and will answer questions from the Opposition parties. It is unlikely to be the end of the matter. Too many contradictions, evasions and alternative versions of events now exist to be cleared up quickly or easily. Mr Ahern's credibility has been damaged. And the handling of the matter by the Minister for Justice leaves much to be desired. The affair has undermined relations between the Coalition parties and may shorten the life-span of the Government. Unfortunately, there are precedents for Mr Ahern's behaviour. The Taoiseach's unwillingness in 1998 to advise his partners about the Rennicks payment to Fianna Fail and his subsequent failure to remember details of his meetings with Mr Tom Gilmartin will be viewed within the Progressive Democrats as part of a pattern.

Some months ago, the Tanaiste warned that the Coalition arrangement would not last if important information was withheld from her party and if trust within Cabinet was undermined. The events of the past few days can only have had a negative impact in that regard.