Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 17 Oct 2023

Final Report of the Independent Scoping Exercise into the Circumstances Surrounding the Death of Mr. Shane O'Farrell: Statements

An Cathaoirleach

We will now have statements on the final report of the independent scoping exercise into the circumstances surrounding the death of Mr. Shane O'Farrell. I welcome the Minister, Deputy McEntee. She has ten minutes for her opening statement, with group spokespersons having eight minutes each and all other Senators three minutes each. The Minister will be called no later than 8.20 p.m. to reply to the debate and statements will conclude at 8.30 p.m.

Before the Minister begins, I welcome to the Public Gallery two great friends of mine, Paul Grover and Steve Mason, from Provincetown and Boston in Massachusetts, US. It gives me great pleasure to welcome them to Leinster House tonight. I also welcome Dr. Aidan Fox from Dublin, who is an equally good friend.

Minister for Justice (Deputy Helen McEntee)

I welcome the opportunity for statements on the report of retired Judge Gerard Haughton arising from the scoping exercise into the circumstances surrounding the tragic and untimely death of Shane O'Farrell, aged 23, in August 2011 in a hit-and-run incident involving a car driven by Zigimantas Gridziuska, who is referred to in the report as "ZG". The sudden loss of Shane at such a young age, with his whole life ahead of him, was a tragedy for those who knew him, particularly his family. I acknowledge his parents, Lucia and Jim, who are in the Chamber and who were in the Dáil earlier, and all his family members who are here this evening. Like many of us in the Seanad today, I have met the O'Farrell family. I know the loss they feel every day, which I acknowledge now in the Seanad, having already done so in the Dáil.

As Senators are aware, the background to the Government's decision to establish the scoping exercise was in response to the desire of both Houses for further examination to be conducted into the circumstances of Shane's death. I thank Judge Haughton for conducting the scoping exercise, including throughout the Covid-19 period, and all those who co-operated with the process. The final revised terms of reference for the scoping exercise were finalised in July 2019 by the then Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Flanagan. The terms of reference required Judge Haughton to advise the Minister on whether there were any circumstances surrounding the death of Mr. O'Farrell that warranted further investigation or inquiry beyond those already carried out and, separately, whether any inquiry was necessary into the systems and procedures for the sharing of information between An Garda Síochána, the Courts Service and the relevant State agencies and bodies operating at the time of Shane's death. It was a requirement of the judge that where a further inquiry was recommended, he should also suggest the form of any such investigation or inquiry, provide draft terms of reference and then suggest the composition of the investigation or inquiry. The position of the Government was always that Judge Haughton was free to make any recommendation he saw fit. The terms of reference were finalised on the basis of advice from the Attorney General. Judge Haughton helpfully sets these matters out in his report, including both original and revised terms of reference.

On the conduct of the scoping exercise, I recognise that the report took almost three years to complete. I understand this was due to the judge's desire to be as comprehensive as possible and also, in part, the impact Covid-related restrictions had on his ability to engage with all the necessary parties. When Judge Haughton submitted his final scoping report to me on 1 June 2022, I then sought the advice of the Attorney General on the matter of publication. Subsequently, my colleague, the Minister, Deputy Harris, brought the final report to the Cabinet meeting on 25 April 2023. At that meeting, the Government noted the final report of the scoping exercise before it was laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas and, on 3 July, published.

The O'Farrell family understandably has been extremely prominent and engaged with the scoping exercise. I thank the family members for their contribution and engagement. As Senators are aware, last November, the Tánaiste, who was then Taoiseach, and I met with members of the O'Farrell family regarding the report, including both content and publication. The Minister, Deputy Harris, also met with members of the family in May this year. The Government and I are very mindful of the family's loss and the significant time family members have spent engaging with many Members in this House and in the Dáil.

It is clear from reading the report that Judge Haughton carried out a very thorough review of all relevant material and has produced a robust and measured report. The 416-page document is comprehensive and sets out all the issues within the terms of reference in some detail. I understand that having fully engaged with each issue raised, Judge Haughton concludes that no further investigation or inquiry is warranted beyond those already carried out. The report gives attention to the circumstances of the tragic incident itself and sets out the elements that contributed to it. In setting out the circumstances, he has been forthright in his view that a variety of factors contributed to the incident. The judge further finds there are no circumstances in the context of the granting, objecting, revoking of bail or the monitoring of compliance with conditions of bail that warrant further inquiry. He makes a similar finding about the systems and procedures for the sharing of information between An Garda Síochána, the Courts Service and other relevant State bodies operating at the time of Shane's death.

Judge Haughton makes several recommendations regarding bail, suspended sentences legislation, amendments to the Road Traffic Act and notices of appeals administered by the Courts Service. For example, the report acknowledges that new legislation has already been introduced in respect of both bail and suspended sentences. The Department will complete an initial examination of legislation in this area shortly, as part of its continuous review of the criminal law, to identify whether any further legislation or amendment is required regarding suspended sentences and-or bail. My officials are also engaging with stakeholders on the procedural matters raised by the judge to see how they might be progressed. While the State's bail laws provide for the refusal of bail in certain circumstances, the presiding judge is entirely independent in the exercise of his or her judicial functions and the decision to grant bail in a particular case is solely a matter for that judge. An Garda Síochána advises that the State's amended bail laws have proven to be effective. All legislative provisions are, of course, kept under review. The Government today agreed to progress in the forthcoming road traffic measures Bill provision for charges of careless driving, arising from a recommendation by Judge Haughton.

It would of course have been open to Judge Haughton to have recommended a tribunal of inquiry, a commission of investigation or an inquiry under section 42 of the Garda Síochána Act if he had found that such an inquiry was warranted. There has been a criminal trial, a Coroners' Court, the independent review mechanism, a Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, investigation and the Haughton scoping exercise concerning the tragic death of Shane O'Farrell. The independent report by Judge Haughton does not provide a basis for the Government to establish any such inquiry.

I will turn now to a couple of issues raised in the Dáil in recent weeks. The first concerns that a file was held within the Garda national crime and security intelligence service regarding Zigimantas Gridziuska. I note that Judge Haughton deals with this in his report and concludes he was entirely satisfied with the co-operation he received from An Garda Síochána in this regard.

The second concerns the return of an exclusion order regarding Zigimantas Gridziuska which was imposed in 2013 and expired earlier this year. I have spoken to Shane’s family on this matter, responded to them, and I undertook to engage with An Garda Síochána. To date, An Garda Síochána have not located the whereabouts of this individual. If his whereabouts become known, I will of course examine this issue again. In such instances, there is a clear process that must be followed. In order to make a further exclusion order, the person in question must be notified of the Minister’s intention to make the order and they must be given an opportunity to make representation to the Minister in this regard. As I have said, I will commit to examining this if the whereabouts of this individual become known.

l am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this matter this evening. Again, as I have said, I know it is not what the family wishes to hear or would want to hear. I regret that this is where we find ourselves again this evening. I can commit that the Department of Justice and other Government Departments and State bodies will continue to focus on implementing the technical and procedural recommendations set out by Judge Haughton in his report.

Acting Chairperson (Senator Victor Boyhan)

I thank the Minister. Before I proceed I will explain that the Order of Business as agreed by the Members today has provided for 90 minutes and I am conscious of the time. We will have enough time for the speakers who are here.

Senator Regina Doherty

I would like to say thanks to the Minister but what she has read out is not acceptable, not to me and not to this Seanad. Shane O'Farrell was killed when he was out on his bike. He was cycling training on 2 August 2011, and Zigimantas Gridziuska, a convicted criminal who we let walk into this country with no checks or balances whatsoever, knocked him down in his car and callously drove away, hid his car, got into his bed and slept like a baby. Shane was 23 years of age, the same age the Minister was at the time Shane passed away, when the world was literally just opening up at his feet.

Arising from interaction with Shane's family, who are here today campaigning for justice, Dáil and Seanad Éireann passed motions calling for the immediate establishment of a public inquiry into the death of their son, Shane. Some deal was struck that saw a scoping exercise conducted instead of this public inquiry. That scoping exercise was chaired by retired Judge Gerard Haughton. I am here tonight to discuss that report because in my opinion it is nothing short of a disgraceful, unprofessional, immature at points, and entirely biased report. There have been so many failings by agencies of the State since Shane's death 12 years ago that it is actually easy to get lost in the details of this case. First of all and very clearly, I am calling for this report to be rejected by Seanad Éireann in the strongest terms given the many errors, omissions and blatant victim blaming on nearly every page of this report. Second, I am calling for the independent inquiry as directed by Seanad and Dáil Éireann in 2018 and 2019 to properly investigate the circumstances surrounding Shane's death, and why Gridziuska was at liberty on that night he killed Shane. Ironically, despite it being very clear in the terms of reference that was given to Judge Haughton, the report does not answer those questions.

Let us first deal with some of the most significant shortcomings of the 420 page report. The Minister keeps citing the report as comprehensive, yet it manages to not answer the fundamental questions as to why the person who killed Shane was at large on 2 August in 2011. There are hundreds of pages and to my mind most of them are cut and pasted from GSOC inquiries, police ombudsman inquiries, and coroners' reports. It cost €500,000 and took four years to complete and it does not answer the fundamental question that the Department, the Minister's predecessor and the Minister have asked as to why this man was at large on 2 August. It is absolutely beyond me how we can accept a report when it does not answer that fundamental question.

Instead of answering the question, page one of the report, paragraph No. 2, blames a young man of 23 years for his own death. We have victim blaming at its absolute worst and it does not end there because the tone of victim blaming inexplicably continues throughout the report. Will the Minister imagine for a second putting herself in the O'Farrell family's shoes? They are the ones who most want and have demanded answers for their son, they have done everything they possibly can for the last 13 years to get those answers, and they open a report where on page one, it blames their own son. A judge who was engaged to determine the circumstances leading up to Shane's death blames Shane himself without a shred of evidence. The evidence the judge does cite on page one had to be redacted because it was an error; after €500,000 and four years, he already has an error.

Probably the hardest part to read in the report is when the judge moves on to criticise the family in every possible way he can. He paints a picture of a family who were critical of An Garda Síochána, critical of GSOC, critical of the police ombudsman, and critical of the Department of Justice, in some way trying to imply that no matter what anybody does the family would never be happy. The reality is that the O'Farrell family has every right to be critical of all of those State agencies. Tonight I include the political system in that long list because if we fail to get the public inquiry that the Seanad and the Dáil both voted for in 2018 and 2019 then we will have failed this family tonight again. Hundreds of pages in, before we get to the end of the report, the author states that he does not believe further investigation is warranted. It really beggars belief that he has not answered any of the questions that were put in the terms of reference.

I will look at some of the major failings. The author says there are no issues with bail that warrants further investigations yet he does not explain how Gridziuska was on bail for six offences at the time of Shane's death. Any right thinking person would think there is something wrong with the system that allows a person repeatedly to be out on bail despite repeatedly committing offences. The bail system in Ireland is clearly dysfunctional when somebody is allowed continue to do that loop over and over again. In July this year, some 12 years after the debatable state our bail system was in, Justice Mary Ellen Ring stated that the State authorities - which we are so proud of - are "making a mockery of the bail system" by not bringing offenders back. The Minister has cited that judges are independent. They are only independent when they are provided with the information that actually allows them to make independent decisions. We are aware that An Garda Síochána does not have training to provide previous PULSE documentation of bail discrepancies. We know that they do not tell the judges in instances. Currently our Minister is saying that the bail system is working but our judges are telling us that the bail system is not working. This is really strange.

The report makes a determination that the existing GSOC reports were adequate in this investigation yet the judge - the author of this report - did not even have the underlying GSOC report to review and he did not even request them. I do not know how the report can say in 460 pages that the GSOC report was grand and that we will stick with it when the judge had not even read or asked for the GSOC report. It is unfathomable.

Another significant question that is unanswered, and the Minister is the only person who can answer it, is whether Gridziuska was an informer. The report appears to acknowledge this when the judge said "confidential documents do exist" in the Garda national crime and intelligence service. What are those documents? Why does an agency of the State have a document or a dossier on Gridziuska? What exactly was the relationship? Was he an informer? Was that the reason he was let go on the night of Shane's death? I do not know any other reason somebody in a clapped out car, with heroin in their possession, and with no insurance to drive the car would be told "Go on son, you are grand".

Another thing really bugging people is that all through the 460 pages Zigimantas Gridziuska was referred to as ZG, as if he was some anonymous person and we can dehumanise him because he did not really matter. Shane O'Farrell was called Shane O'Farrell on every single page of this report and yet we sought to talk about the person who took his life as ZG. It is not funny.

In the report, Judge Haughton refers to speeding as "trivial offences". In the past months the Minister, Deputy McEntee, and the Minister of State, Deputy Jack Chambers, have rightly sought to double the penalties for offences with regard to road traffic accidents because we have had such a loss of life - and particularly in the past summer - of our citizens in this country. Judge Haughton thinks that those speeding offences are trivial matters. This in itself is enough for us to recognise that this report will be rejected. I could go on talking about the shortcomings of this report for probably another eight minutes. I reject this report and I ask my colleagues here to reject this report. The report should be struck from the record of the Houses of the Oireachtas. Shane's family deserve the proper answers they have been asking for, and which Seanad and Dáil Éireann asked for in 2018 and 2019.

I ask my colleagues to join me in putting down that motion in all our names next week to reiterate the State's insistence that we open a public inquiry into the circumstances leading up to the death of Shane and his death. The family has been fighting for justice for 13 years. We have contributed to their trauma by retraumatising them and by the disgraceful behaviour from every single agency, including the Minister's Department. It is not good enough and it is not in our name.

Senator Paul Gavan

I commend the previous speaker for her passion and the fact she spoke the truth for all of us. We will all repeat this message for the next while. I begin by welcoming Jim and Lucia here this evening. I cannot imagine what sort of day you have had. I watched the Dáil debate earlier. For the second time, you have heard effectively the same message from the Minister.

I commend the family of Shane O'Farrell, especially his mother, Lucia, and father, Jim, for their determination and dignity in their search for truth and justice for Shane, who was struck and killed by a hit-and-run driver while out cycling in August 2011. For parents, the loss of a child is unbearable, but Shane's family has carried the immense loss of Shane, who was only 23 years old at the time of his killing, while campaigning for the truth about the circumstances of his killing.

For the past 12 years, the O'Farrell family has been through a mind-boggling institutional nightmare, involving the Garda, the courts system, the Oireachtas and Ministers, in the search for justice. The family received the full support of the Dáil in a Fianna Fáil motion put forward by Deputy Jim O'Callaghan in 2018 calling for an inquiry into the investigation into Shane's death by the Garda. The facts of the case are alarming and add to the family's grief as they deal with the Byzantine world of the police and justice system.

The driver of the car which killed Shane, Zigimantas Gridziuska, pleaded guilty to hit-and-run charges and received a suspended eight-month sentence on condition he returned to Lithuania. The leniency of the sentence was outrageous and deeply offensive to the family. The outrage was added to when a Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, investigation found he had several previous convictions, was out on bail at the time he killed Shane and may have been a police informer. He had received a six-month prison sentence which he did not serve due to a clerical error in the courts. Prior to the killing of Shane, no attempt was made by the Garda to arrest him. Had gardaí arrested him, Shane O'Farrell would be alive today.

In 2019, the then Minister for Justice, Deputy Charles Flanagan, set up a scoping inquiry into Shane's death, carried out by District Court Judge Gerard Haughton. At the time, the family believed the then Minister and his Department were narrowing the terms of reference of the inquiry. The family subsequently withdrew their co-operation with the scoping inquiry and said they regretted being involved with it. In a press statement, the family said it was very disappointed with the scoping exercise report and that it was regrettable it had to issue a press release to deal with outstanding matters arising from a report which was brought to the attention of Judge Haughton, the Minister, Deputy Helen McEntee, and the Department of Justice and which remain unanswered.

The family's statement made a number of pertinent criticisms of the report. The scoping exercise was set up to decide whether there was a need for a further inquiry. Despite the abundance of unresolved issues relating to the killing of Shane and subsequent issues, the judge concluded not to recommend an inquiry. The family was very concerned that the judge was not supplied with nor did he request the underlying GSOC statutory reports which formed part of the terms of reference and appear essential to the exercise, including the effect of Zigimantas Gridziuska not serving a custodial sentence and the question of whether he was an informer.

The family also described it as offensive for the judge to make findings in respect of Shane and the circumstances of his death while excluding the trial of Zigimantas Gridziuska and adopting a victim blaming narrative. The family refute Government claims that the report is complete, based on its length. The report fails to answer the fundamental questions or explain how or why Zigimantas Gridziuska was at liberty on 2 August 2011 when, for a period of two years, he had repeatedly committed offences on bail and breached bail conditions imposed on him by the District and Circuit Courts. Neither does the report address whether members of An Garda Síochána were aware of these breaches.

The family's very firm view is that Shane's case raises serious issues about the criminal justice system, bail, previous convictions, coroners' inquests, the effectiveness of GSOC and the transparency around using informers by members of the Garda. Regarding coroners' inquests, the Minister has yet to outline serious reforms to the system despite an Irish Council of Civil Liberties, ICCL, report recommending sweeping reforms. GSOC has been largely set up to fail in most instances. The new policing reforms provide it with more ability to investigate Garda misconduct and wrongdoing. The Shane O'Farrell case demonstrates the need for these reforms to be urgently implemented, as does the recommendation from the ICCL that the power of prosecution be removed from the Garda and given to the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP. There are clear legal issues which remain unresolved.

The family deserves answers, accountability and closure. The family wants the Government to commit to what the Oireachtas resolved to do, namely, hold a full public inquiry. Everything else has turned out to be inadequate and has only added to the family's pain. The available State processes have failed the family. They seek an effective investigation of the true and full circumstances of Shane's unlawful killing. They believe the only way to achieve this is for the Government to establish a public inquiry.

In her speech, the Minister said, "It is clear from reading the report that Judge Haughton carried out a very thorough review of all relevant material and has produced a robust and measured report." Nobody believes that. I do not believe anyone in this room believes that. To be frank, I do not believe the Minister believes that.

We all know the way politics works in here most of the time, which is that Ministers come in, often with the best of intentions, but are told there are limits to what they can do and say and are handed a script. This is one of the occasions when we need to put away the script. This is not a party political issue; this is an issue of justice. All of the events around the killing of Shane demand a public inquiry and we all know that.

As I have said a couple of times, few of us are here for very long and afterwards we need to reflect on what we did during our time here in terms of fundamental questions of justice. Everybody knows something horrifically wrong has happened to our system in relation to Shane O'Farrell. It comprises a bizarre set of circumstances, the like of which I have never seen or heard of. So many people can see that something fundamentally wrong has happened, yet the Minister has come in here this evening, just as she did in the Dáil, to say there is nothing to see here. She has said the report is clear and measured. It is nothing of the kind.

The Minister owes more to the family, including Lucia and Jim. If she does not deliver that, then she will have to live with that for the rest of her life. I do not think she should. I agree entirely with the previous speaker. We should all unite around this issue, put down another motion and insist on what the Dáil and Seanad have already voted for coming to pass. We need a full public inquiry and, finally, justice for Shane O'Farrell.

Senator Robbie Gallagher

I welcome the Minister back to the House. I, too, extend a warm welcome to Lucia and Jim and their two daughters. I take this opportunity to pass on my sincere condolences to you on the tragic loss of your dear son, Shane, at the early age of 23. No parent should live to see that happen. To lose a child in sudden circumstances is a traumatic and life-changing event for any family. To lose a child in the circumstances in which you lost Shane is truly heartbreaking. You carry a life sentence with you and my heart goes out to you.

Shane was just 23 years of age when he was tragically killed in a hit-and-run accident. As far as I am concerned, on 3 August 2011, the criminal justice system failed the O'Farrell family. Twelve years on, the criminal justice system is continuing to fail the O'Farrell family. All the O'Farrell family are looking for is justice.

It is not a witch hunt. They are not after heads. They just want to ensure that no family sits in the Visitors Gallery and lives the life that they are living. That is what this is all about and that is what we strive for. That is why the Members of this House and the Lower House passed a motion five years ago, in 2018, calling for an independent public inquiry to shine a light on exactly what happened that night, when Zigimantas Gridziuska, a man with 42 previous convictions and numerous warrants out for his arrest, was still free to drive a car that knocked down their son and brother. That is what this is about. As far as I am concerned, that call from both Houses for a public inquiry still stands.

There is nothing in this report that gives me confidence that we have got to the bottom of this very sad saga. I join with others in calling for a motion to be laid before this House. I have no doubt that, like before, we all speak with one voice on this matter and that we all want to see the truth of what actually happened. I am sad to say that Judge Haughton's report was not what this House or the Lower House called for. We got a scoping inquiry but it is not the end of the road for this sad saga.

What is really heartbreaking for the O'Farrell family is that rather than shine a light on the shortcomings of the criminal justice system, the light in many ways is left shining on the memory of Shane O'Farrell in that a detailed report that took four years to compile almost blames Shane O'Farrell for what happened. It talks about lights not being on a bicycle. That is not what we asked for here. Shane O'Farrell is where he is today because of a criminal justice failure - a systems failure. The man who was driving the car that night, as Senator Doherty said, probably should never have seen the shores of this land. He never should have got in here in the first place yet he was to run for years, committing crimes, involved in drug dealing, yet at large to do what he did on that particular night.

I genuinely take my hat off to the O'Farrell family. If something of that magnitude were to happen to my family, I do not know if I would conduct myself in the same dignified and respectful manner that they all do. They are an absolute credit. They have been carrying a cross with them for the past 12 years and they will carry that cross until the man above calls each and every one of them.

With respect to the Minister, there is a duty on every one of us. I am not going to criticise the character of Judge Haughton but, clearly, the job that he conducted has in many ways raised more questions rather than supplying answers. As I said, it is not the end of the road, as far as I am concerned. We have many more miles to travel. Questions are being asked as to why this man was allowed to continue on his way on that evening of 3 August. Was it perhaps that this man was an informer? Here we are again, with more questions than answers. It is disappointing that, 12 years on, we are still standing here having the same conversation.

The other outstanding matter is that this man was banned from the State ten years ago, as the Minister noted. What I took from that is that as far as the Minister is concerned, if she becomes aware that he may be entering the State again, that simply cannot happen. Can the Minister indicate whether it is possible, in the Ireland that we live in today, that this man could come back here without any of us knowing a thing about it? I would be grateful if the Minister could answer that question.

This is not the end of the road, as I said. I also said that this is not a witch hunt. It is about the O'Farrell family finally having closure in respect of this sad saga. Given the way this issue has dominated the lives of the people sitting in the Visitors Gallery since that 3 August, the very least they deserve is the truth, the very least they deserve is that they can finally put this to rest and, I respectfully suggest, get on with the natural mourning of the loss of their dear son and dear brother. As politicians in both Houses, we have to make sure that the State does not fail that family any further than it has. If putting down a motion in this House brings that conclusion for the O’Farrell family, the Minister can take it that every single one of us in this House will gladly and proudly sign that motion. I ask the Minister to by all means digest the contents of the report from Judge Haughton but also to give a commitment here this evening that this is not the end of the road and that we will finally give closure to the O'Farrell family in order that, as I said, they can get on with grieving the loss of their dear son and dear brother.

Senator Pauline O'Reilly

I welcome the Minister. I thank the O'Farrell family for meeting with us last week and I thank Senator Doherty for organising that and for inviting me as a representative of the Green Party. I know the family have also met with my colleague, Tate Donnelly, in Monaghan, and we have sat down and had a meeting so that I understand the full details. As many others have said, I offer our deep sympathy. It does not matter how long ago it is; I understand that the pain is still being felt.

The entire purpose of an inquiry is to shed light on something, and that is what people were calling for. It is not just the family. Of course, it is very important that families want to understand what has happened to their loved ones. However, what we actually found was that it was the entire Oireachtas that said there is something going on here that we do not understand and we called for an inquiry. The report not only fails to shed light on the matter, it muddies the waters even further. That is the real difficulty that I have. In fact, it has both gone beyond the terms of reference of a scoping inquiry yet not met the terms of reference. It is very hard to put your finger on it but, there are so many problems with this report.

I listened to the Dáil debate earlier. One comment that stood out to me was made by Deputy Jim O'Callaghan, who said it actually makes findings of fact but does not call any witnesses in order to determine what those facts might be. It is looking into the word of other people and cases. There are no references or footnotes, as has been pointed out by the family. How do we actually get to the bottom of more than 400 pages with no footnotes and be able to point out all of the errors? Yet, this family have pointed out quite well to us all of the failures of the report.

Again, I do not want to go into the character of the judge, but he was not asked to go into the details of the case. The real issue is why Zigimantas Gridziuska was committing an offence while on bail. He was on bail for two years and, during that period, committed 34 offences in Ireland and also breached bail by going to the North of Ireland and committing more offences there. We still do not have any answers as to how that could happen under our system. That is the real issue that the judge was asked to address. He was asked to scope what the parameters of an inquiry would be in order to look at that. The scope did not look at this issue and, therefore, we cannot possibly close it.

We cannot possibly say that there has been an inquiry and that it has resolved the issues, because it has not been done. When we are talking about justice we often say it is about ensuring not just that justice is done, but also that it is seen to be done. I am not only going to say that there is a lack of transparency here. It is not only that justice is not being seen to be done because we cannot read a report that does not have footnotes; it is also that justice clearly was not done. The part where the family and the State have really been let down is in the first couple of pages of the report, in effectively blaming the victim. I find that outrageous. To start a 400-page report in that manner really does leave question marks over the entire report because again, the judge was not asked to do that. I am not going to attack his character, but if I was reading that as a cold neutral observer, I would ask what is being hidden and why we are drawing attention to this when there is a lot more that has to be answered. I am not going to go into whether we have enough evidence as to whether the perpetrator was an informer. In many ways it is not what we are being asked to ascertain here, but at the very least there should be an answer to the question. If he was not an informer, we are still left with all of the questions marks as to why the justice system failed.

If, at the end of all of this, we are to say it is fine, we do not need an inquiry and we sign on the dotted line, where are we leaving society then? Are we saying it is okay for a person to be on bail for two years, one judge having said that if the man committed one further offence he would have to appear before the court and would be put behind bars? That did not happen. He committed 34 offences while on bail in the Republic and three in the North of Ireland. An hour before the final offence happened, this man was stopped by gardaí, with no NCT and with drugs in the car, yet nothing happened. He was told to go off about his business. Would that happen to any of the rest of us? I do not think so. I want to make sure it does not happen again. I am not confident of that because we do not have the answers. As a mother of young people, I know that your heart is in your mouth every time they leave. At the very least you expect the State to be looking out for you and to be on your side, and not on the side of those who perpetrate these kinds of criminal acts. That is what has happened. It is not good enough for us to stand here and say that the report sets out the judge's findings. On behalf of the Green Party, I am joining with my colleagues in saying that we do not accept this. There needs to be a proper inquiry. This exercise was not an inquiry. It was never designed to be an inquiry. It was not what the Oireachtas asked for. We need an inquiry not just for the family and not just because it will provide justice for Shane, but because it is about guaranteeing justice for everyone who goes out their door and expects to be taken care of by this State.

Senator Marie Sherlock

I thank the Minister for coming to the House. I am glad we are having these statements and I pay tribute to those who have organised them this evening, but I have listened to the debate in the Dáil and the debate here and there is a surreal disconnect between what the Government and the Minister are saying and what everybody else in both Chambers is saying. There is a surreal loyalty to the process and to what I and many others consider to be a deeply flawed report and its recommendations.

I read the Minister's reply. With the greatest of respect, it is a cop-out. There is a fundamentally flawed attitude here. To me it reads like we are saying we will be okay in the future and there is no need to look back on the past. If we do not understand our past, how can we ever hope to make our future better? Arguably, nowhere is that more relevant that when it comes to An Garda Síochána and how our courts treat people in this country. The Minister has not said it specifically, but the attitude I am picking up from the response we got this evening rides roughshod over the very serious and legitimate concerns being raised by the O'Farrell family about the report and the scoping exercise into their son's death. What is worse for me is that this deeply flawed report casts a cloud over serving members of the Courts Service and An Garda Síochána. We may never have the truth come out if the Government continues with the approach that this scoping exercise is sufficient and if it accepts its recommendations.

I pay tribute to the O'Farrell family, who are here in the Gallery this evening. I do not think any of us can understand the toll that the last number of years have taken since 2011. We are here because of their absolute determination to get justice for their son and brother. Of course, justice will never bring him back, but it will at least explain why their son and brother was killed on that night. Justice will show why there were failings in our policing and courts systems, and will detail why there was a litany of mistakes and failures. Justice will show why mistakes were made, and whether it was down to pure incompetence or something more sinister. That has been alluded to by others. Right now, for the O'Farrell family, it is a case of justice denied. I met Lucia and her daughter about a year ago. It is an enormous tribute to her and her family that they have continued this campaign. I am personally so disappointed that we are at this juncture all these years on.

Notwithstanding the 2018 motion passed by the Dáil and Seanad, if we were to take a step back we might see having a scoping exercise as an achievement and progress in itself, given that we hold judges in this country in very high regard. I think we would expect that a scoping exercise would be done to the highest standard. This report is not a scoping exercise. It passes judgment - Senator Pauline O'Reilly mentioned a statement of fact - on the manner in which Shane O'Farrell died that night. That goes beyond any terms of reference. As a cyclist, I find it harrowing to read the victim-blaming that goes on in this report. The report deflects from some of the most important questions at the heart of why Shane died. It appears that even the GSOC statutory reports were not even relied on or indeed sought out. The report passes comment on how every offence should not warrant custodial sentences, which is fine in itself, but yet fails to place importance on the question of how somebody could be on bail for multiple offences and not have that communicated before the District and Circuit Courts. It is surreal that anybody could be on bail for six offences at the one time and have a previous history of 34 convictions and still slip through the net. As Senator Pauline O'Reilly said, I do not think the rest of us here would expect to be met with that treatment. How did that happen in the case of the man who killed Shane O'Farrell? I take very seriously any document produced by the Judiciary in this State, but I believe there are very serious flaws in this report. It is a reflection on the Minister's Department and her Ministry that she is not willing to open up the scoping exercise or commit to a public inquiry. I agree with the calls of Senators Doherty, Gavan, O'Reilly and Gallagher to reject the recommendations of this report.

While the O'Farrell family are foremost in my thoughts tonight, I am also thinking about another family, the family of Terence Wheelock. Terence died months after sustaining life-changing injuries in a Garda cell in Store Street Garda station in 2005. There was a GSOC investigation in 2014. Having read the report, to my mind there are inconsistencies, inaccuracies and more questions than answers in it. Looking at the experience of Terence Wheelock's family, it is really important that we ask what the impact of justice denied is to a family and a community. For Terence's family, it is a sense of disrespect, a sense of being ignored and a sense of being treated like second-class citizens. That is being passed on to the next generation. As legislators, we all have a responsibility to ensure that people do not feel failed by An Garda Síochána and the legal system in this country.

The Minister has the responsibility to ensure that justice is served. Tonight, we stand with the O'Farrell family. All of us who have spoken here have called for that full inquiry. I ask the Minister to reflect on what she has said to us this evening and to reconsider her position on the investigation into why Shane died. The Government needs to do an awful lot more.

Senator Michael McDowell

At the outset, I wish to indicate that at one point I was involved on behalf of Lucia O'Farrell in legal proceedings. I am no longer involved in those proceedings. I declare that before anybody makes some point about it.

The O'Farrell family knows that nothing that can be done now can bring Shane back. They also know that nothing can be done to reverse the outcome of the trial of Mr. Gridziuska; it cannot be reversed. However, faced with the circumstances that they were faced with, they had a simple choice: did they just crumple up and suffocate on their own grief or did they do something to protest about the circumstances that led to a man who should not have been driving a car on this occasion colliding with their son on an August evening when he was out on a spin on his bike and killing him? Were they simply to accept that, as so many people do in fatal accident cases, and say that this was irreversible, unpredictable, could not be foreseen, nothing could be done about it and there was nothing to be said except to grieve their loss?

In fairness, they decided to take the position that this man should not have been driving that car on that occasion. If he had not been driving that car on that occasion their son would not have been killed, regardless of what the facts were proven at the trial of Mr. Gridziuska. They asked themselves what led to their son being involved in an incident with a driver like Mr. Gridziuska that evening. The more they concentrated on the background facts, the more they became convinced. Everybody who has looked at all the facts shares their conviction that he should not have been driving that car on that occasion and would not have been driving that car on that occasion if the State had, through its organs, namely, An Garda Síochána and the court system, taken reasonable steps to impose upon that driver the common-sense requirements of criminal justice. They cannot put that out of their minds. They cannot say that this man was driving a car in circumstances where he was faultless, where the system should have allowed him to be there, where Shane cycling his bike on that August evening should have been mown down by him and left to die on the side of the road. They should not have been in the position of dealing with those circumstances. The reason they should not have been in that position is very simple. The Irish justice system utterly and completely failed them. The Irish justice system as a whole let this man out on the roads to interact with members of the Irish public, north and south of the Border, for years, with nobody taking any steps to impose on him the rule of law.

The Constitution refers to vindicating the right of people to their life and all the rest of it. The State must have a duty to vindicate people's rights not simply by prosecuting them when they are accused of infringing on other people's rights but by taking every reasonable step to ensure that people who are a danger to other people's rights are in fact prevented from infringing those rights. That is what the State has by way of constitutional obligation to protect people. There was no protection here whatsoever.

Everything is recorded on the Garda PULSE system in theory. There is a computer record of every incident. There is supposed to be some interaction between the court system and the PULSE system. However, the simple fact is that this man was the subject of suspended sentences. Nobody ever took any steps to enforce those sentences. Nobody ever brought him back before a judge and said, "Serve your sentence." No garda who knew he breached the terms of the suspended sentences that had been imposed on him ever held him to account. Nobody brought him before the bar of justice at any stage in circumstances that could have given rise to preventing what happened to Shane O'Farrell. Those are the facts.

Judge Haughton was a member of the District Court. He was part of the system. He saw case after case brought before him in whatever court he was in in Dublin. He probably never asked himself, "Does anybody seriously look at the suspended sentences I am imposing and follow up on them to see if somebody actually merits the activation of their sentence, except some hyperactive garda with some kind of agenda against the accused?" My experience of the criminal law in Ireland is that there has been virtually no attempt in the vast majority of suspended sentences ever to see whether somebody has or has not complied with their obligation to keep the peace, be of good behaviour and not to infringe the law. Practically nobody on a suspended sentence is brought back before a court except in the most egregious circumstances because the system does not provide for that.

It was for this reason that I encouraged Lucia O'Farrell and her family rather than to seek damages from the State for the death of Shane to look to the Executive and the Legislature and ask for an inquiry, one which would really go to the heart of how poor the enforcement of our legal system is when it comes to suspended sentences. Such an inquiry would go to the heart of why this man was at liberty to do all the things that he did. It would look across the Border and ask if there is co-operation between the PSNI and An Garda Síochána on offences committed that have an implication for cross-Border policing.

That is what I urged them to do. I urged them to seek an inquiry. They did not get an inquiry. I will not describe what was given as a whitewash; that would be unfair to Judge Haughton. I will not decry what he did, but this needed the helicopter view - a view looking down on everything that happened. It needed to ask why this sequence of events took place and if the Irish system robust and proper, a public inquiry which would for once deliver to An Garda Síochána and the courts a clear statement of their obligations to ensure that their suspended sentences actually mean something. The Irish system has failed the O'Farrell family.

If Senator Gallagher tables a motion for a proper inquiry, I will be the first to support it.

Senator Paul Daly

I welcome the Minister and I also welcome and acknowledge the O’Farrell family. I compliment Senator Doherty for organising to have the O’Farrell family in for the briefing in the audiovisual room last week. While I am very familiar with this case, I was struck hearing it all again and being taken through all the instances and pitfalls that were evident before the final ending. If people were to see it on Netflix, they would not believe it to be true. They would think it is fiction. There was a tragic ending on 2 August 2011, which ended the O’Farrells’ world, I can assume, in many ways. It was definitely the lowest day of their lives and the beginning of lives they never anticipated or expected.

Going to the other end of the spectrum, in my own case, 26 April 2016 was probably the highest point of my life, and certainly the proudest day of my life and that of all my family. It was the day I was elected to Seanad Éireann for the first time. As somebody who came from a family with no previous history in politics, the pride was immense. For me to achieve the office to become, along with my colleagues, a lawmaker and custodian of the law and order of the country was a proud day. We have many knocks in this world. Not everything goes right and we get blamed for as many things as we get praised for – indeed many more. One of the proudest days is today, seeing the O’Farrell family here getting their wish. We collectively as Members of this House - those of us who were in the last Government and the Members of the Lower House - passed the motion to give them the inquiry they so richly deserved so they could get accountability and closure.

Who is the authority higher than us that reversed and changed that decision? It was agreed by both Houses. I heard in the Dáil, in answer to a similar question, that the Government does not have to accept Private Members' motions. It passed through the Government. Why did the Government change its mind? Even though there was a minority Government, a Private Members' motion does not get through both Houses unless the Government is in support of it. What changed, why did it change and who was behind the change? Everybody knows in life people have no objection to an inquiry unless they are afraid of what that inquiry may find.

Our criminal justice system has failed and it failed not just the O’Farrell family. Without adding to their grief, I wish to ask a question for one moment. They have probably imagined this as one of the questions people have when there is a fatality in a family. If the gardaí had stopped him and held him for ten seconds more, if Shane had decided it was too wet that night to go for his cycle, if this tragedy did not happen, or on it happening, if the O’Farrell family did not have the strength to carry on and keep asking the questions, would we ever have heard of Zigimantas Gridziuska? Would he still be out there? The vulnerable people of Irish society deserve the answers to those questions. How many more people like Gridziuska are out there because the system has failed? We are burying our heads in the sand as a Government to the fact that we have a problem within the criminal justice system and our policing services. The first step to solving any problem is the admission that we have a problem. While we bury our head in the sand and refuse to have an inquiry into what happened and why it happened, we will never get a solution. God knows how many more people similar to Zigimantas Gridziuska are out there tonight. We all know him now – even though we struggle to say his name. It is embedded in here. If the tragedy had not happened, would he still be out there? Would we ever know? Would we know that we have such a flawed system? We cannot bury our head in the sand.

I support all my colleagues who said we will table another motion. I will ask the question again. If and when that motion is tabled, and if and when it is passed, who is the authority or power above us who will probably stop and block it again? The scoping exercise asked more questions than it answered, but it ticked the box. It almost gave us what we agreed we wanted. It ticked that box. We agreed we wanted an independent inquiry. The Minister then asked somebody else to do a scoping exercise to know whether we really needed an independent inquiry.

In conclusion, what was the position I was elected to on 26 April 2016? What is my role and what is the role of my colleagues in this House and the Lower House if, when we pass a motion, it can still be just ticked off and another route taken that suits? And who did it suit? Who did it suit to do a scoping exercise as opposed to an independent inquiry?

Minister for Justice (Deputy Helen McEntee)

I thank colleagues for their contributions and for bringing this to the House. I will start with what I said in the Dáil previously because it is important and I think it is why we and the O’Farrell family are here. First, it is to make sure that all the facts and information are laid bare and that all the information surrounding the death of Shane is known and understood but, above all, that we can have and use that information to make sure that no family goes through what the O’Farrell family has gone through. We as lawmakers, legislators and people, as the Senator rightly said, in the positions we are in change and improve the laws and make sure they are as strong as possible. We should call out things that are not working and where there needs to be change. That is why we are all here. That is our overall goal and objective.

Our discussion tonight revolves around a report that was agreed by the Government. The scoping report was clear in what it set out. A requirement for a further inquiry was not precluded in this scoping exercise. The Government has been clear on that. The judge was free to suggest any form of investigation or inquiry, or to provide the draft terms of reference - whatever he saw fit in that regard. This decision was to be taken having looked at a number of things. The terms of reference required Judge Haughton to advise the Minister and, in turn, the Government whether there were any circumstances surrounding the death of Shane that warranted further investigation or inquiry beyond those already carried out, such as the criminal trial, the coroner’s court, the independent review mechanism and the GSOC investigation. As well as that, he was asked to look at whether an inquiry was necessary into the systems and the procedures for sharing information between An Garda Síochána, the Courts Service and other relevant State bodies operating at the time of Shane’s death.

Again, as I mentioned, the judge found there are no circumstances around the granting, objecting and revoking of bail or the monitoring of compliance within conditions of bail that would warrant further inquiry beyond what has already happened and what was highlighted already, where there are deficiencies and where changes in the system were and still are needed. The judge made clear recommendations around bail, the suspended sentences legislation, the Road Traffic Act – which I mentioned we made a decision on only today – and notices of appeals administered by the Courts Service. The report, which I have read and is very detailed, looks at where there are and have been failures in the system and where changes need to be made. Judge Haughton made clear recommendations in that regard. Regarding the terms of reference, he made clear – again, I stressed this earlier – he would not restrict the submissions that were brought to him by any party involved in this in the context of this overall exercise. That is why we have this extent and scope of the report.

The report was presented to me and I appreciate that it took much longer than people anticipated for many different reasons. It was considered by me, the Department and the Attorney General. Based on that consideration and those recommendations, the Government noted the report and noted clearly what Judge Haughton stated in the report, which is that no further inquiry is necessary. We are here clearly discussing the report that was decided upon by the Government.

The report itself is very clear that no further inquiry is necessary, based on what the judge has been asked to do here, on the terms of reference, the outcome and the facts he has laid out in this report. Again, I appreciate that this is not what anybody here wants to hear but these are the facts I have before me and this is the report that has been laid before me. I do not think any Minister for Justice, either myself or the previous Minister, or anybody in this House would ignore what has been presented here, namely, a report that has been worked on for more than three years. That report very clearly outlines the reasons for the decision that has been taken by the particular judge in question. That is what I, as Minister, and the Government have to take on board. We have considered and not disputed the report that was laid before the Government and before these Houses in recent months.

Acting Chairperson (Senator Victor Boyhan)

That concludes the Minister's remarks. When is it proposed to sit again?

Senator Regina Doherty

Tomorrow at 10.30 a.m.

Cuireadh an Seanad ar athló ar 8.10 p.m. go dtí 10.30 a.m., Dé Céadaoin, an 18 Deireadh Fómhair 2023.

The Seanad adjourned at 8.10 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 18 October 2023.