Vol. 467 No. 2
3 Mr. O'Donoghue asked the Minister for Justice when her attention was first drawn to the transfer to other duties of the garda who received or handled the original warrant in relation to the Anthony Duncan extradition case; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [11781/96]
30 Mr. J. Walsh asked the Minister for Justice when her attention was first drawn to the transfer to other duties of the garda who received or handled the original warrant in relation to the Anthony Duncan extradition case; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [12919/96]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 and 30 together.
The Minister for Justice is in Belfast today representing the Government in the pursuit of a peaceful solution to the Northern Ireland problem. I know all Members will wish her well.
I refer the Deputy to the statement the Minister for Justice made on this matter in the Dáil on 23 May and to the answers to the questions which followed that statement, when she said that her attention was first drawn to this matter on 22 May. I also draw the Deputy's attention to the fact that the Minister for Justice gave a written answer to precisely the same question from the Deputy on 5 June.
In an article by Ms Veronica Guerin in the Sunday Independent on 2 June it was stated——
Sorry, Deputy O'Donoghue should know that quotations at Question Time are not in order.
Perhaps I can put it in another way. It was stated in that publication that on 15 April 1996 the Garda authorities made it known to the Department of Justice that it accepted responsibility for the error in relation to the warrant. On 18 April the garda who handled the warrant was transferred to other duties. Is the Minister of State saying, first, that the report was inaccurate and, second, that it could conceivably be true that the garda would be transferred on 18 April and that this would not be made known to the Minister for Justice until on or about 22 May?
The Deputy is aware, because he participated in many of them, and other Members will be aware that a large number of questions have already been answered in relation to this case and the specific matter to which the Deputy now refers.
And many unanswered questions.
These questions were directed mainly to the Minister for Justice and the Taoiseach. The Tánaiste answered a question on the subject on 5 June. The Minister for Justice answered 13 parliamentary questions and made a comprehensive statement to the House on 23 May which was followed by extensive questioning. The Taoiseach answered 11 questions and the issue was the subject of considerable discussion in the course of those questions and on the Order of Business on 22 May. The answer to the specific question has already been given a number of times.
I asked the Minister of State two specific questions. I am in order in this House in requesting that the Minister of State answers them truthfully.
The truthfulness of the Minister ought not to be called into question.
I am not calling it into question, I am merely asking the Minister of State to reply to two specific questions. Is the Minister of State saying that the report in the Sunday Independent of 2 June was inaccurate? Is the Minister of State stating that the garda who handled the extradition warrant on 18 April 1996 was transferred without the knowledge of the Minister for Justice or her Department?
I do not want to waste the time of the House but as I have been pushed on this matter I will repeat what the Minister for Justice said on a previous occasion. She and I stand over what she said on that previous occasion in her statement on 23 May 1996 at Col. 2088 of the Official Report as follows:
... yesterday evening I discussed this matter with the Garda Commissioner with whom I was attending a meeting of the Anglo-Irish Conference in London. In the course of that conversation I learned that the sergeant who had custody of the warrant in this case had been transferred to other duties. I sought precise details on this matter and have learned — about an hour ago — that the transfer took place on the directions of the Commissioner on 18-19 April... The sergeant was in charge of the unit which deals with extradition matters... He was the officer who had custody of the warrant in this case and the Commissioner has informed me... that he felt it would be inappropriate for this sergeant to have responsibility for the handling of extradition papers until the cricumstances of the present case had been fully cleared up.
That was the reply which the Minister gave on that occasion and on other occasions. That is the reality. Any speculation or comment in newspapers or elsewhere contrary to that explanation by the Minister for Justice is wrong.
Regarding the position of the Garda sergeant, the Minister indicated, in response to a written parliamentary question from the Deputy on 5 June, that she had been informed by the Garda authorities that the officer in question was transferred to other duties in the crime and security branch at Garda headquarters. The officer has not been transferred back to the extradition section but he continues to deal with extradition cases in which he previously had an involvement.
The week we are discussing is the same week the Taoiseach was in contact with the British Prime Minister about the Northern Ireland talks. In that context it is unbelievable that they would not have discussed the mistake in relation to the original extradition warrant in this case. A report was made by the Garda authorities to the Minister for Justice on 15 April and the Minister was aware of the transfer of the garda on 18 or 19 April. This amounts to nothing short of a massive political cover-up.
The Deputy would like the country to believe there was a cover-up in relation to this matter. However, there was not. The Deputy has been worrying this bone since 22 May and, although I do not wish to mix metaphors, he has also been fishing. He has not come up with anything and he will not come up with anything contrary to the statement in the House by the Minister for Justice in relation to the events on 22 May. That is a matter of record. I am not detracting from or adding to it; that is the truth.
Let us not forget the questions the House is dealing with are subject to a rigid time limit.
The only reason I continue to ask questions is the stone-walling tactics being used by Government spokespersons in relation to the matter. I ask the Minister of State, for the third or fourth time, if the report in the Sunday Independent on 2 June 1996 is factually incorrect.
I have lost count of the number of times the Deputy asked the question but he will get the same answer. Any report or speculation contrary to what the Minister stated in the House is wrong. The Deputy's persistence is admirable, but the only thing I have noticed in addition to that is the way he continually tries — it is ironic — to exonerate the British Government from any blame in these matters.
What was that last bit about?
