Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

The commission of investigation was established to look into allegations of malpractice in An Garda Síochána in the Bailieboro district and included an investigation into the manner in which the complaints of Sergeant McCabe were dealt with by An Garda Síochána. I welcome the report and thank Mr. Justice O'Higgins for his work in compiling this report and investigating the matter. It is important to note that in his report, Mr. Justice O'Higgins states:

It would be quite wrong to regard the investigations examined and criticised by the commission as being indicative of the general quality of investigations in the Bailieboro district. To do so would be most unfair to the gardaí in that district, who have worked under the shadow of allegations for many years. ... Although this report is critical of individual gardaí in specific investigations, it would be unfair to regard those criticisms as applicable to the quality of their work in general, or to consider the actions criticised as typical of their performance.

It is important to make this point because when matters get heated and people are in a difficult situation, they can often lose that objectivity and, for want of a better phrase, tar everybody with the same brush. This is not a witch hunt and in times of crises and when things become difficult, it is important to remain cool and objective and to keep a clear head in order to come to a right and just conclusion. It is important to note there are a number of good gardaí in that station who have done fantastic work and I accept they must have been in an extremely difficult position in recent years.

There are, however, serious concerns surrounding the findings of this report and I believe this is accepted by the Garda Commissioner and the Minister. Members have much work to do to deal with the findings of the report and to implement its recommendations to restore public confidence in An Garda Síochána, which understandably has been rocked. Some of the matters investigated make for difficult reading and there is no doubt but that the victims involved in those cases were failed by those who were supposed to protect them in vulnerable situations. I can only state that my heart goes out to the victims and their families and Deputy Connolly articulated this point well in respect of the issues dealt with. I also echo Deputy Connolly's unhappiness with the statements released by the Commissioner and the Minister in this regard. I also would have liked to have seen more empathy in those statements and a greater understanding of the difficulties those individuals, victims and families have been through.

I have major concerns about the manner in which Sergeant Maurice McCabe was treated and I acknowledge this point has been echoed by many colleagues in this Chamber. There is no doubt in my mind but that there was a pattern of undermining him and seeking to damage his good character. He has shown considerable resilience in seeking out the truth and doing the right thing at a huge cost to himself. Were I a lower-ranking garda today who had watched what was done to Sergeant McCabe, I wonder whether I would have the courage to come forward and report malpractice or wrongdoing within the ranks. It would be a huge request to make of any young garda and as ordinary gardaí undoubtedly do not feel confident they would be protected in such circumstances, this is a serious matter with which Members must get to grips. The protection of whistleblowers and repair of the damage done in this respect must be a top priority for the Garda Commissioner and the Minister, as I believe it will take years to fix the damage this has done.

I accept the difficult position in which the Minister, the Commissioner, counsel and those involved in the commission have been in this regard but it also is quite a serious matter that confidential transcripts from the commission of inquiry were leaked in sections. Who leaked these extracts? We do not know. What was their motivation? We do not know and can only guess. It was selective and targeted leaking that had the effect of highlighting certain aspects of the inquiry that otherwise may have been missed in the 350-odd pages of the report and people can draw their own conclusions on this matter in respect of who might have leaked those sections and why they might have done this. Rightly or wrongly, the commission was set up in such a way as to make its investigation confidential and perhaps Members should examine the merits of this for future commissions of inquiry.However, the witnesses involved in this commission of inquiry had a legitimate expectation that those transcripts would not get into the public domain and Members certainly must investigate how and why that happened.

Having said that, however, we must live in the real world. Those extracts, whether we like it or not, made it into the public domain and the public have made judgments based on that piecemeal information. I appreciate that it was a difficult situation for the Minister and the Commissioner to deal with, but I do not think it was dealt with properly or adequately. It was open to the Commissioner to clarify these matters if she so wished.

Likewise, the suggestion that information that everybody outside this House is discussing cannot be commented on by the relevant the Minster is, quite frankly, absurd. The issue surrounding the Commissioner's instructions to her legal team has correctly been the subject of much public concern and scrutiny. In recent weeks, it has dominated the debate on this issue.

This investigation goes to the core of policing in our country. Public confidence in An Garda Síochána and its work has been rocked, as has public confidence in the Commissioner and the Minister. People are looking on and they want clarification on certain issues. I am not the first Deputy to have raised this.

If we look at the transcript extracts to which we have access, particularly those dealing with the Commissioner's instructions to her counsel, there are clearly questions to be asked and answered in this regard. I will quote some of those extracts. Mr. Smyth, counsel for the Commissioner stated: "My instructions are to challenge the integrity certainly of Sgt. McCabe and his motivation." When pushed further, he said: "His motivation and his credibility in mounting these allegations of corruption and malpractice." Mr. Justice O'Higgins seeks to clarify and asks: "In other words, that he made these allegations not in good faith but because he was motivated by malice or some such motive and that impinges on his credibility? If those are your instructions from the Commissioner, so be it." Mr. Smyth replied: "So be it. That is the position, judge." Mr. Justice O'Higgins further asks: "Those are your instructions from the Commissioner?" Smyth replies: "Those are my instructions, judge". He further states: "I mean, this isn't something I am pulling out of the sky".

I appreciate, as the Minister has stated in this House, that those extracts could potentially be taken out of context. We do not have access to the preceding paragraphs, nor do we know what came after. We do not know in what order these transcripts came. However, since we do not have the full transcripts, we can only operate on the basis of the information we currently have. On balance, I think the extracts give a clear picture of the Commissioner's instructions to her counsel and there appears to be no ambiguity in terms of the Commissioner's instructions. It was a clear attack on Maurice McCabe's integrity and his motivations in suggesting that there was malpractice in the Garda Síochána. There was certainly an attempt to damage his credibility in this regard.

How does one reconcile that with the Commissioner's public comments? There is an acceptance that publicly she was very supportive of Sergeant McCabe. There appears to be a conflict between what the Commissioner was saying publicly about Sergeant McCabe and what she was instructing her legal team to do in the commission. On numerous occasions she has been asked by Deputies to clarify this, but she has failed to do so. It is an extremely serious matter.

The Commissioner's statement of 25 May seeks to deal with this question. She stated: "In relation to communications with the legal team representing An Garda Síochána, it is important in terms of receiving advice and giving instructions that privilege in such communications is protected so as not to adversely impact on the workings of An Garda Síochána and its entitlement to seek and obtain legal advice on a confidential basis in this instance and in the future." I agree with her on that point, which I accept, but we must live in the real world. The extracts suggest that she was saying one thing privately and something very different publicly. We must deal with what is in the public domain because the public are already discussing it.

The Commissioner further stated:

These constraints, which reflect important principles of law, restrict my capacity to address the issues which have been raised in relation to the approach taken by An Garda Síochána before the O'Higgins Commission. However, I can confirm that An Garda Síochána's legal team was not at any stage instructed to impugn the integrity of Sgt Maurice McCabe or to make a case that he was acting maliciously.

How on earth can one reconcile that statement with the extracts I read out previously? This needs to be clarified, and let us make no bones about it, the Commissioner can clarify this. I am asking the Minister to request the Commissioner to do so. The Minister must also take this very seriously. I want to make it clear that the Commissioner can tell the public what her instructions were to the legal team. She can do so, as has been pointed out prior to this by Deputy Connolly. It is also important to make the point that the Commissioner is choosing not to do this. I want to move on from this issue because I have put it as far as I can.

There is also the issue of two gardaí who fabricated evidence to suggest that Sergeant Maurice McCabe was acting maliciously in bringing forward these allegations.

See this speech in context