On 22 March 2002 the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Mrs. Nuala O'Loan, presented a report to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen. The report related to allegations made by a person described as a serving officer of the Garda Síochána concerning the handling of intelligence information about the activities of a paramilitary group in that year and about drug related matters in the period 1995 to 1996.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs passed the report to my predecessor, the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, Deputy O'Donoghue, who, in view of the gravity of the allegations involved, decided an examination of the issues should be carried out independently by Dr. Dermot Nally, former Secretary to the Government, Mr. Joseph Brosnan, former Secretary General of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Mr. Eamon Barnes, former Director of Public Prosecutions, with the terms of reference to examine matters arising from the report raising concerns of the activity of the Garda Síochána during 1998, dated 22 March 2002, prepared by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland for the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and on the basis of the examination to report to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and, if considered appropriate, to make recommendations.
I received the group's report earlier this year and I have consulted the Attorney General about it. It is against that background that I am now making this statement. Certain legal issues arise because all the allegations which the group looked into were made by a member of the Garda Síochána who is suspended and facing criminal charges on unrelated matters. In those circumstances, in making a summary of the group's findings publicly available at this stage, I want to make it clear that nothing I say is intended to, or should be taken as, reflecting on the general credibility of the person in question.
In summary, the group has informed me that the allegations can be summarised under three headings. The first is incidents which it is alleged could have been prevented. These are allegations that actions which could and should have been taken by the Garda Síochána could have prevented three terrorist attacks in Northern Ireland in 1998, that is, the mortar attack on the RUC station at Armagh on 10 March, the mortar attack on Beleek RUC station on 9 May and the bomb attack on Omagh on 15 August. The second is alleged ministerial interference with prosecution process. This is an allegation of a ceasefire deal after the Omagh bomb between the Irish Government and the Real IRA and of ministerial interference in the judicial process. The third is alleged unlawful or improper conduct on the part of Garda officers. These are allegations of encouragement or of complicity in criminal offences or other improper conduct by senior Garda officers.
The group has informed me that it held its first meeting on 29 April 2002 and subsequently met on 62 occasions. It interviewed 25 persons, some more than once. It received a number of written submissions, some from people it did not consider necessary to interview in person. In particular, the group states as follows:
When setting up the Group your predecessor indicated that the Garda Commissioner had confirmed that the Group would have the full co-operation of the Garda authorities, including access to all relevant material. The Group wishes you to know it has received this full co-operation and access. The Group's thanks are due also to other persons including serving and retired PSNI officers who helped it in its work.
My predecessor, when announcing the establishment of the group, indicated that he would make a statement on the group's findings. In accordance with this commitment, I can now inform the House that the group has informed me that it concluded that there was no foundation for the allegations which it examined. While there was never a commitment that the report would be published, I am aware of the strong desire of the relatives of those killed in the appalling atrocity at Omagh for what has become known as the Nally report to be published. I am also aware that the failure to do so may lead some to suggest that the State is refusing to come clean. I will return to that suggestion before concluding my remarks.
If there were no other considerations of the wider public interest I would be more than happy to put the report into the public domain. It is a lucid and compelling document and if people had access to it few if any would dispute its conclusions. The group's covering letter states that the report "deals with highly sensitive matters involving the security of the State and possible risk to the lives of individuals. It also describes Garda operational procedures and methods, public disclosure of which could adversely affect future operations." I hope it will be generally accepted by Members of this House that under these circumstances no Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, no matter how strong his or her desire to deal with the concerns of the relatives, could put such a report into the public domain. To issue a redacted form of the report is not a practical proposition as it would require the deletion not only of the names of individuals but also of details of operational procedures and methods to an extent which would render the logic and force of the report nugatory and its conclusions no more meaningful.
There have been many media reports about allegations that the group was asked to examine. I do not propose to comment on or respond in detail to this speculation. There is, however, one suggestion that has been persistently reported which, subject to the constraints I have outlined, I must deal with specifically: that the Garda failed to pass on to the RUC information which could have prevented the Omagh bombing. It is hardly necessary for me to spell out the grave implications of this if it were true. Everyone will understand why such an allegation is of such profound concern to the Omagh relatives and all right-thinking people. In fact, no such allegation was made to the group. On this point the group says:
The core allegations. . . about events preceding the Omagh bombing are that: a senior Garda officer would have been prepared, if a vehicle had in fact been stolen. . . to allow it to go through in order to protect [an] informant; and [that] no intelligence was passed to the RUC about information, alleged to have been received on the eve of Omagh that the RIRA, who had been trying to steal a vehicle in the Dublin area, had obtained one elsewhere (place, vehicle type and destination unspecified).
These are very serious allegations. However they are quite different from allegations that the Gardaí let the vehicle which was used in the bombing in Omagh go through or that they had intelligence about that vehicle. . . which they had failed to pass on to the RUC. No such allegations have been made to the Group and no basis for any such allegations has come to its attention.
As I outlined earlier, the group dismissed the allegations as being without foundation.
The group also made some recommendations. In doing so it stated:
The Group's only general recommendations relate to the desirability, while preserving confidentiality and security, of keeping better records of North/South contacts and exchanges in intelligence matters, and a written code of instructions and guidelines on intelligence-gathering and agent-handling.
The Group understands that action has now been taken on both of these matters but recommends that the arrangements should be reviewed in the light of its report. The Group also recommends that consideration should be given to whether legislation covering intelligence-gathering and agent-handling would be desirable.
These recommendations are receiving the necessary attention from me and the Garda Commissioner.
I am sure all Members of the House are grateful to the members of the group for undertaking a difficult task in the best traditions of public service. That such a group concluded that the allegations had no foundation is to be welcomed, not least by those gardaí who have been living under their shadow. However, I am aware from my contacts with the Omagh relatives that some of them will be disappointed that I am not in a position to offer further information. I emphasise that had evidence of Garda wrongdoing been established by the group there would have been no hesitation on my part or that of the Government in making that finding public.
What I have set out today is not my assessment of the allegations in question but that of the independent group asked to examine them. I do not believe any Member of this House would have grounds for calling its work into question. I am aware of calls which have been made for a public inquiry into these matters on the basis that it would dispel people's genuine concerns, but on the basis of the group's report there are no grounds for such an inquiry to be established. Any repetition of unfounded allegations will not change that. What happened that day at Omagh was one of the worst outrages in the history of this island. Accordingly, allegations of culpability on the part of the Garda Síochána or others must be fully examined and that has been done.
Earlier I said that the non-publication of this report, for what I and the investigation group believe are valid security reasons, may lead some to suggest that the State is refusing to come clean. I doubt that any reasonable person approaching this matter in a fair-minded and objective way will consider it remotely likely or credible that not just one but all three of the following criteria apply. First, a group of senior gardaí, knowing the truth to be otherwise, have conspired to distort and misrepresent the facts about one of the most serious atrocities in the history of this island. Second, the Government of the day has decided to support that Garda conspiracy. What motive could any Government have for such action? Why, if such a conspiracy exists, are so many members of the Real IRA behind bars? Why would the Garda or the Government risk exposing the conspiracy by continuing to pursue the perpetrators vigorously – a pursuit which has already resulted in one of those involved serving a sizeable prison sentence? Third, three distinguished individuals whose integrity is not at issue and who, as they have acknowledged, were provided with access to all relevant material, have proceeded to join in and support the other conspirators in a cover-up. The likelihood that any of these is true must be considered remote. The likelihood that all three apply is non-existent.
It must be appreciated that even though a reasonable person objectively considering claims made about any atrocity involving major loss of life may conclude that the claims do not stand up to scrutiny, it does not necessarily follow that those who have directly suffered the consequences of the outrage will readily be able to bring themselves to take the same view. It is a perfectly understandable human reaction for people whose lives have been scarred by such outrages to attach weight to accounts and interpretations of events, especially those presented by what are taken to be informed sources, in the hope that they may help to explain or throw more light on the circumstances that have brought unbearable tragedy and suffering to their lives. Understandable though that reaction may be, responsible commentators, especially those in positions of authority, do no service to those who grieve when they persist in lending credence to presentations of events that lead us away from rather than towards the truth, even if it is done in the name of keeping hope alive.
Against this background, it would be the height of irresponsibility for me to put in the public domain information that would be of use only to terrorists in waging their campaigns. We should not lose sight of the fact that the cruel mass murder at Omagh was committed by terrorists who are intent on using violence to overturn the democratic will of the people on this island. Our continued priority should be to support and assist the Garda Síochána and the PSNI in their fight to defeat the evil agenda of the perpetrators and bring them to justice. As I indicated earlier through the Taoiseach, I am prepared to revisit this matter when we have more time in the new Dáil term.