The Deputy refers to the Independent Review Mechanism established to review certain allegations of Garda misconduct, or inadequacies in the investigation of certain allegations, which were made to me as Minister for Justice and Equality, or the Taoiseach with a view to determining to what extent and in what manner further action may have been required in each case.
A panel consisting of two Senior and five Junior Counsel was established for the purpose. The counsel appointed to the panel were nominated by the Attorney General and were all selected on the basis of their experience of the criminal justice system.
A total of 320 cases were referred to the Panel. The issuing of notification letters to complainants commenced on 29 June 2015 and concluded on 8 February, 2016.
- In 318 cases the complainants were notified of the final outcome of the review of their cases.
- In 1 case the recommendation was of an interim nature whereby the complainant was invited to submit further material. The complainant has provided such material which is currently being considered by counsel.
- In 1 case the complainant had passed away.
The reports provided by counsel and containing their recommendations in each case constitute legal advice to me and they are, accordingly, subject to legal professional privilege. While the report and recommendations from counsel were not provided to complainants, I have sought to ensure that letters to complainants should not only set out the recommendation of counsel, but also outline, as far as possible, the reasons for the recommendation. To that end I appointed a retired judge, Mr Justice Roderick Murphy, to advise on the preparation of the letters and independently vouch for the fact that the summaries of conclusions and the reasoning behind them are a fair reflection of counsel's advice.
My Department continues to be engaged on the follow up actions arising from the recommendations made by counsel. These include consultations which are on-going with the Attorney General related to the terms of reference for a number of statutory inquiries under section 42 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005.
As the Deputy is aware, the Independent Review Mechanism was not established to act as a Commission of Inquiry or Investigation. Nor was it designed to make findings. Its purpose was to triage the allegations to see whether further action was needed and what that action would be. I know that some Deputies have argued that the review should have involved interviews with the complainants and other relevant persons, but I think that is to misunderstand this process. To have required counsel to hold hearings where they would interview everyone concerned would in effect have been to hold full-scale investigations into over 300 cases, without having made any attempt to see if this was necessary or practical.
I have previously assured Deputies that where further action was recommended by the review then that will occur. And that is, indeed, what has happened. I have made a number of requests to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission under section 102 (5) of the Garda Síochána Act 2005 to investigate certain matters. I have sought reports from the Garda Commissioner with a view to informing complainants of relevant matters. In a small number of cases, I will be establishing statutory inquiries under section 42 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005. In a large proportion of cases counsel did not recommend any further action by me because no such action could reasonably be taken, particularly in cases which had already been through the legal process or because they involved complaints against statutorily independent bodies, with whose decisions I could not interfere. In no case did counsel recommend that a Commission of Investigation be established.
I am aware that many complainants were unhappy with the outcome of the review process. In circumstances where individuals have genuine but necessarily subjective concerns about how their particular cases were originally handled, it is inevitable that many complainants who were informed that no further action was recommended, or where the recommendation fell short of what they had hoped for, would be unhappy with that outcome. The crucial point, however, is that every case has been reviewed by independent counsel, who have made an objective recommendation based on the details supplied by the complainants themselves.
