Niall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Fianna Fáil, which has welcomed the publication of the Cooke report, was the first party to propose the establishment of an independent review panel to investigate the entire issue. We argued that this body should be composed of people with technical expertise, a judicial figure and an international police force member. Unfortunately, this model was not pursued.

Moreover, the immediate fallout out from the Cooke report on unlawful surveillance raises broader concerns regarding the relations between the Garda Síochána Ombudsman and the Garda. Those questions remain to be answered.

In addition, there are serious questions to be answered regarding the possible bugging of GSOC's offices. The Government, however, has put a very successful spin on some of the contents of the report along the lines of, "This matter is now settled, there is nothing more to see here". That is far from the case. In fact, the more we are told, the more questions arise. Commenting after the publication of the report, the GSOC chairman, Mr. Simon O'Brien, stated: "There is still an outstanding anomaly and in the words of the judge, as he says in these rather febrile areas, it's difficult to know whether that could be in relation to unlawful intrusion ... So, question marks still remain." Questions do indeed remain and it is about time we found out the answers to those questions.

With regard to the possibility of bugging, I would observe in response to the report that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I expect Mr. Justice Cooke would agree with me on that point, given his references in the conclusions of the report. For example, he stated in paragraph 15: "It is ultimately extremely difficult to determine with complete certainty whether unexplained anomalies of the kind identified in this instance were or were not attributed to unlawful intrusion." In other words, there is no conclusive evidence either way with regard to the bugging of GSOC.

It is important to emphasise that the Cooke report vindicates the actions of GSOC. The investigating officers and members of the commission acted in good faith, the report observes, in investigating the alleged bugging of the offices. This undermines the criticism by the former Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, of the commencement of the investigation. He tried to play the man and not the ball, he sought to undermine GSOC without seeking the full evidence of what was going on, and he dismissed the need for further investigation of the issue when these allegations were published. On 19 February 2014, Mr. Justice Cooke was appointed to review the GSOC bugging scandal. At that time, the former Minister tried to transform GSOC from a victim of this episode into the villain. The fact that GSOC did not report this crime to the former Minister or the Garda is a damning indictment of the gross mismanagement of the sensitive relationship between the force, GSOC and the Department of Justice and Equality. It was a toxic triangle of distrust. I hope the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, as someone who brings a new approach to the Department of Justice and Equality, will work to build the trust which was lost over the past three years.

The report's contents and conclusions are of little comfort to ordinary citizens given the evidence of the dysfunctional relationship and clear lack of co-operation between An Garda Síochána, GSOC and the Department of Justice and Equality. For public confidence to be restored in the role and competencies of GSOC, legislation is needed to strengthen and extend its powers and remit. I hope the Minister will be in a position to bring that legislation before the House as soon as possible. However, the Government's current legislative proposals fall significantly short of what is necessary to ensure a strong and robust ombudsman commission that will protect the rights of both gardaí and citizens. The Protected Disclosures Bill 2013, which is currently progressing through the Houses, deals with whistleblowers generally and is not designed to take into account the specific needs of GSOC. The ombudsman commission needs new powers of inquiry to investigate the operation and administration of An Garda Síochána and not simply complaints made by individuals about individual members of the force.

Turning to the specific findings of the Cooke report, Mr. Justice Cooke describes as "not convincing" the accounts that a wireless AV remote control device for audio and video equipment in GSOC was connecting and transferring data to an external "Bitbuzz" hotspot in a nearby café. This finding has been queried by IT experts. The judge also found that an alleged fake UK 3G network, which was detected on an iPhone as operating in the vicinity of GSOC's offices, was "highly likely" to have been caused by the testing of a new 4G installation by a mobile provider. This finding is in contradiction with Verrimus's original findings.

On the third alleged threat, the "ring-back" to a telephone line in GSOC's offices in the early hours of the morning, the judge found that it was impossible to "categorically rule all possibility of covert surveillance", but said it was clear the evidence does not support the proposition that actual surveillance of the kind asserted by The Sunday Timestook place. Mr. Justice Cooke made the point that in the world of covert surveillance and counter-surveillance techniques, it was extremely difficult to determine with complete certainty whether unexplained anomalies were or were not attributable to unlawful intrusion. We agree with that assertion. It is clear to us, however, that a number of key questions arising out of the report need to be answered. If these matters are not clarified, questions will remain over what exactly happened at the GSOC offices. I hope the Minister can offer some answers in this regard.

First, it remains to be clarified as to why there was tampering with the media device, named in the report as device 4B, installed in the conference room of GSOC and which sought to connect with a Wi-Fi hotspot in a nearby café. Who installed this device? Verrimus indicated that it exchanged 120 data packets with the Wi-Fi network. Nobody provided Mr. Justice Cooke with any proof of content of these data packets, but it has been argued that the cafe's Wi-Fi could have been hijacked by a third party and used to gain access to GSOC data.

Questions also remain regarding the possibility of physical surveillance at GSOC's offices. The presence of a white van and two men outside the premises coincided with the fake UK mobile signal which sought to gather data from GSOC's networks. Verrimus only detected this UK mobile signal and data-seeking when the white van was present outside GSOC's offices, which seems like more than a coincidence. Mr. Justice Cooke noted that testing of a 4G installation network was likely to be responsible for this. That was not proven, however, and the judge's methodology has been questioned in this regard. The question remains as to why Mr. Justice Cooke accepted mobile operators' conclusions but not those of Verrimus.

The hands free land-line test by Verrimus on Mr. Simon O'Brien's telephone using music blasts at 1.40 a.m. resulted in someone calling back the telephone at that time. This will seem odd to any objective observer and would seem to indicate that someone was connected to the line. Who made that call and why? Was it to check the line was working after Verrimus's music test? Mr. Justice Cooke stated that there was no explanation for this occurrence. Perhaps the Minister will be able to enlighten us.

One of the most unusual incidents dealt with in the report is the account of the Verrimus staff member leaving Dublin. Why was this individual, having gone through security at Dublin Airport, sought out and photographed by an unidentified individual? It is claimed that this was a tactic by other surveillance operators to show that those carrying out investigations of bugging had been identified and noted by those on the other side. This is another question that is unanswered in the report and dismissed by those briefing the press from the Government side.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the report is its reference to the involvement of the Department of the Taoiseach in seeking to meddle in the Cooke inquiry. On 25 February, a caller alerted Verrimus and GSOC to an alleged attempt to place a member of the security forces on the inquiry team in a bid to manipulate the outcome. Subsequently, there was an unsolicited offer from the Taoiseach's office to place someone who apparently had 20 years security experience on the inquiry team.

Questions remain about the role of the Taoiseach and the former Minister for Justice and Defence in any alleged attempt to place a mole on the inquiry team. Who was this man? Why did the Department of the Taoiseach seek to appoint an individual unsolicited to help with the report? In her reply in this debate, will the Minister clarify this matter for the House? It may have been that the Taoiseach was acting in good faith in his actions but in order to ascertain that fact, we must know more about the circumstances surrounding the approach.

One area of criticism I would have of the report overall was the very limited remit of the terms of reference which tied the hands of Justice Cooke. In that sense, it was not an independent investigation into whether GSOC was bugged. The judge was only given the power to investigate the Verrimus report, which had already been conducted, and not to carry out fresh investigation. None the less, the work of the judge is to be commended given the terms of reference put forward by the Government.

The Government, unfortunately, cannot be commended on its approach the Cooke report and the matters which gave rise for the need to investigate the alleged bugging of the GSOC offices. Serious questions remain about the Government's handling of this controversy. Before any investigation was conducted and without any knowledge of whether GSOC had been bugged, the Government made every attempt possible to dismiss the very serious concerns raised by GSOC and others. Instead of seeking the truth, the Government's reaction to this controversy was to dismiss the concerns entirely, undermine the office of the independent Garda watchdog and attempt to manipulate the reporting of this issue.

This Government's approach to resolving the current matters of concern undermining public confidence in the administration of justice is to establish commissions of investigation and not follow through on their recommendations. We are still awaiting Government action on the Guerin report which called into question the deficiencies in Garda management and the Department of Justice and Equality.

In order to fully address the issues raised in the Cooke report, tackle the central allegations at the heart of the matter and restore public trust in the oversight system of the Garda and its relationship with GSOC, action must be taken now. Reform of An Garda Síochána and the establishment of an independent policing authority are central for improved morale in the Garda force and in the citizens' confidence in its police service. We need an independent police authority to manage the monitoring, supervisory and oversight functions of An Garda Síochána. We need new legislation which increases independence and impartiality of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission. We need honesty from this Government in regard to the contents of the Cooke report which raise further serious questions which remain to be answered. We need a new approach from the Department of Justice and Equality which recognises its failings and acts to address them.

The Minister will be judged as a success or failure in this House on these matters. Fianna Fáil has been vocal in raising concerns surrounding these issues and will be pursuing a constructive approach in supporting reform in our police service. We will support the Minister in seeking to re-establish the public's confidence in our justice system, a confidence that has been shattered over the past three years. I hope the Minister will be brave enough to take the necessary steps to implement that goal.

See this speech in context