asked the Minister for Justice whether his attention has been drawn to the statement made before the Naas District Court on Wednesday, 23rd of May, by a Chief Superintendent of the Gárda Síochána to the effect that police orders were that if arms were produced by the police they were to use them and use them with deadly effect; and if he will state whether the orders referred to are in the nature of general orders to the police in the whole of the Free State; or whether they referred only to the police on duty in Naas on the 13th April; what the terms of the orders are; by whom and under what statutory authority were they issued; to whom were they issued; and what purpose they were intended to serve; and if he will state how many Gárda were on duty at Naas on the 13th April, and the total number and the nature of the arms and the total amount of ammunition in their possession.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Police Orders Regarding Firearms.
No instructions or orders as to the use of firearms were issued on the occasion in question. The statement made by the Chief Superintendent was apparently based on his interpretation of a memorandum on the use of firearms by police officers, issued by General O'Duffy in November, 1932, when he was Commissioner of the Gárda Síochána.
No useful purpose would be served by the giving of the information asked for in the last part of the question.
Arising out of the Minister's reply in connection with this business that took place in Naas, would the Minister consider my appeal for an immediate inquiry into the whole affair?
Why were you not allowed to put down a question?
Do I understand from the Minister that the Chief Superintendent misinterpreted the instructions which he said were issued in 1932?
I do not admit that at all.
Does the Minister then admit that the instructions which the Chief Superintendent had were that if arms were produced in Naas they were to be used with deadly effect?
The Deputy should not take me as accepting the accuracy of the report as published in the newspapers.
Is the Minister aware that in reputable newspapers the report of the Chief Superintendent's evidence states that he used those words, and will the Minister consider whether or not it is a proper interpretation of the instructions? Will he tell the House what exactly the instructions are, so that the House and the country may be fully aware as to the position in which meetings of this particular kind stand with regard to the police and the use of firearms?
Was this report in the Irish Press? I think you said a reputable newspaper.
The Irish Press was careful to cut out the word “deadly.” The Irish Press said “used with effect.”
Would the Deputy say where he gets those reputable newspapers in the country?
Any instructions issued to the Guards, whether contained in a memorandum or otherwise, were confidential, and I am not prepared to disclose them.
Would the Minister say whether the Superintendent in question has rebutted the public report of his remarks?
I am not prepared to state that.
So the position is that the instructions held by the police at Naas were that if arms were produced by them they were to use them with deadly effect?
I do not admit that.
Will the Minister tell the House what he does admit in respect of the instructions that the police have with regard to the use of firearms?
The furthest I am prepared to go in answer to that question is to say that certain instructions were contained in a memorandum issued by General O'Duffy in 1932, as to when and in what circumstances firearms might or could be used. The evidence given by the Chief Superintendent was based on his interpretation of that memorandum and the instructions contained in it.
Does the Minister, in his position of responsibility, accept the situation now that Chief Superintendents in the country may interpret those instructions to mean that when firearms are produced at all by the police they are to be used with deadly effect?
I do not admit that.
In view of the responsibility of the Minister in the matter will he say what steps he intends to take to change any misinterpretation that may be placed by the Guards on those instructions at the present time?
If I am satisfied that there has been any misinterpretation the Deputy may take it that all necessary steps will be taken to deal with the situation.
Will the Minister say what steps he has taken?
I am not prepared to state that.
Is the Minister prepared to admit that the Chief Superintendent ran amok the same as the cattle did?