Vincent P Martin (Green Party) | Oireachtas source

There has been some discussion regarding the prolonged and inordinate nature of delays in respect of issues where the person is not under notification or is under notification. I will deal with the latter situation first, where someone has been notified of a serious complaint having been made against him or her. In such cases, it is incumbent on all concerned to throw all available resources at the issue. From my professional life as a lawyer, I know the subjects of complaints have sleepless nights for weeks and months on end. Their reputations have been put in tatters, and they might never recover, even if the people concerned get a favourable outcome. That is something we should all take away from this meeting. If the forces of law and order are to protect us all, then we must do more and do better to ensure people are not unduly suffering such inexcusable and inordinate prolonged delays. The process should not be going on for a day or an hour longer than is absolutely necessary. We are dealing with members of An Garda Síochána.

Regarding matters that are not notified to people under investigation, I take the point made by Senator Ward and others. We can cite natural justice in this regard. Some timeline should be put in place in this regard. In the cases of people not under notification, can they be watched day and night indefinitely? I think there should be some test of reasonableness in this context.

I refer to the subcategories. I understand fully the criminal aspect and Senator McDowell made that point. If there is prima facieevidence of concern in a case, then we cannot tip people off by telling them they are being watched. What about disciplinary matters, though? I am not so sure it is possible to throw the cloak of natural justice around a case that is a disciplinary matter and not be a criminal matter and decide the subject of the investigation will not be notified indefinitely and until the those carrying out the investigation feel like it. I have sympathies with the representative bodies in that regard. I would like to hear their responses on this issue.

It was said that members of An Garda Síochána should not be held to a higher standard than senior high-ranking civil servants. It is a highly entrusted job. Do representative bodies disagree with some speakers on that point? Would they accept that when there is an outcome and adverse finding, such as on a higher level in the courts, there are aggravated grounds for further penalty in sentencing due to the entrusted role An Garda Síochána has? As is the case with a priest or, for public optics, a judge, gardaí have an impact on society due to the precious responsibility they have. When a person is afforded all the realms and protections of natural justice, if it does not go right for that person in due process and fair procedures, would the representative bodies accept sentencing parameters which recognise that it is an aggravated factor? This is in respect of the minority of the wonderful people in the force.

The word "overreach" was used. Notwithstanding overreach, would it be a fair comment to say, on behalf of the representative bodies, at this stage in our journey in a modern society, that they should not only recognise but embrace independent judging and supervision? The days of the police watching the police are over. Do the representatives agree on that fundamental concept? While they may say there is overreach, I would not like that to be confused, and not wishing to put words in their mouths, with their having a difficulty with independent judgement and investigation of complaints. I hope they agree that, whatever about their concerns about overreach, there is nothing to be feared in a modern society from the fundamental point about not just recognising but embracing independent investigation and the vote of confidence that instils in the longer term in the trust and confidence society must have in An Garda Síochána.