asked the Minister for Defence, with reference to the case of the retired officer raised on Vote 47 in the Dáil on 22nd May 1962, whether a court of inquiry was held in relation to the matters at issue in the case as alleged or at all; and, if so, (a) whether the proceedings and findings were duly transmitted as provided by Article 119 of the Rules of Procedure (Defence Forces) 1954 (S.I.No. 243 of 1954), and (b) whether the character or military reputation of the officer concerned was adversely affected by anything in the said proceedings or findings.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Army Officer's Retirement Gratuity.
64.
The reply to the first part of the Deputy's question and to (a) of the second part is "Yes". As to (b) of the second part, an opinion adverse to the character or military reputation of the officer concerned was not formed.
65.
asked the Minister for Defence, with reference to the case of a retired officer raised on Vote 47 and dealt with in the Minister's reply in the Dáil on 22nd May 1962, whether the provisions of Article 117 of the Rules of Procedure (Defence Forces), 1954 were complied with in relation to that officer before he retired.
The reply is in the affirmative.
66.
asked the Minister for Defence whether, in view of his statement in the Dáil on 22nd May, 1962 that the delay in reaching a decision as to the payment of the balance of a gratuity awarded to an officer was due to this point about the issuing of a warrant for the arrest of the CQMS, he will now say whether the responsibility of the officer for a loss to public funds can be affected by the decision of the High Court as to the validity of the warrant; and, if so, in what way, and to what extent.
As I indicated when speaking about this case in the Dáil, I am endeavouring to bring it to a conclusion which will be fair to public funds and not unfair to the officer. It must be apparent to the Deputy that if the ex-CQMS had paid, or still, pays, the amount ordered by the district court, it would have a bearing on the financial measurement or assessment of the officer's failure in his administrative responsibilities.