Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute on this important Oireachtas committee report into Garda oversight and accountability and I join colleagues in commending the Chairman, an Teachta Ó Caoláin, for progressing it. The report is a comprehensive document that provides an outline of the Garda oversight mechanisms currently in place, with the committee hearings functioning to review these powers and identify how they could be strengthened to make oversight more effective. The committee engaged in extensive questioning of GSOC, the Policing Authority, the Garda through the Commissioner and the Garda Inspectorate.

On the face of it, we have an extensive oversight structure, with GSOC investigating matters of alleged misconduct by gardaí, public complaints and matters referred to it by the Policing Authority or the Garda Commissioner. The Garda Inspectorate has inspection powers over the operation and administration of the Garda and advises the Minister and the Policing Authority on best practice. The Policing Authority has oversight of the Garda's performance.

The Garda Síochána Act 2005 was a landmark law, but it came after what was arguably the greatest scandal ever faced by the Garda. The Morris tribunal identified gross misconduct and corruption within one Garda division.

It is unfortunate that the reforms to oversight in this jurisdiction have been driven by intermittent crises of confidence in the work the Garda is doing. We must take this report now and strive to do better, not because of a national scandal but because we want the police service to be human rights compliant.

I acknowledge that reforms have been made to at least introduce a theoretical model allowing for the independent investigation of complaints, but there is clearly a problem concerning the level of public confidence in how complaints are handled, and there is often a lack of transparency. The members of GSOC are appointed on the nomination of the Government. However, the practice is that it is the Minister who chooses and there are no independent applications, interviews or competition. The European Human Rights Commissioner has stated that is not fully compliant with human rights based practice which stipulates that the ombudsman should be accountable to the legislative assembly.

As far back as 2013 when GSOC was under the spotlight regarding a failure to investigate certain complaints expeditiously, it resulted in the submission of a special report to the then Minister for Justice and Equality on its public interest investigation of Garda compliance with informant handling procedures. The report was at pains to outline the commission's dependence on Garda information and the barriers that existed to it in accessing the information. Accessing such information was necessary for the organisation to be able to fulfil a core function effectively. The report explicitly stated that it "reflected a serious weakness in the independent investigation of complaints", leading to questions being raised over the oversight investigative function of GSOC. That was reiterated in a subsequent report that same year.

One of the difficulties regarding complaints procedures is that they are often not as independent as they need to be. Research conducted in this and other jurisdictions has suggested that the habit of gardaí investigating gardaí leads to a lack of public confidence. While the policing skills of the Garda are valued and the experience of members should not be disregarded, they can often be prone to viewing a matter through the eyes of another garda as opposed to a complainant member of the public, and even where they are absolutely professional and do not engage in that practice, there is the risk that they appear to be biased. That is relevant at the grassroots level of the Garda as one of the committee recommendations is that the minor complaints should be investigated through standard Garda line management rather than soaking up GSOC resources. Clearly, there is merit to this idea. However, careful attention must be paid to how that would be implemented in order that people who have legitimate grievances can have faith that the senior garda to whom they complain will investigate the matter effectively.

The Garda in general is well respected by the public. One only has to examine the esteem in which people in rural areas hold their local stations to see that. However, that connection with the public does not automatically equate to accountability to the public, and as this committee report outlines, there is much more to be done in this regard. Policing structures throughout Ireland can only benefit from maximum openness, accountability and oversight. Sinn Féin is committed to working within the existing structures of accountability and oversight throughout Ireland, to strengthening accountability structures where they do not work properly, and to creating new structures where they do not yet exist.

It was important that the committee report referred to the Patten commission report and the Good Friday Agreement. It was, and remains, our view that the model of oversight that emerged from Patten, namely, an independent civilian management board, independent community policing partnerships operating at district level and an independent ombudsman to handle complaints, offers the greatest potential for ensuring policing is non-partisan, that it can be held to account in the event of wrongdoing, and that its primary focus is on policing within the community.

The Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission is not actually independent. It is almost entirely dependent on the Garda to conduct its investigations for it. A number of key staff are seconded from the Garda, others were transferred directly from the old Garda Complaints Board or simply retired from the Garda Síochána to take up a position immediately in the ombudsman commission. Complainants' reported experience has involved huge delays in responding to and progressing complaints, failure to return calls, failure to keep complainants updated on the progress of investigations, despite express commitments to do so, and a failure to provide reasons for decisions. Some but not all of that can be explained by resource issues.

All of the above significantly undermine any semblance of transparency or openness in the complaints process, making confidence in the current system impossible. The report found that there is a lack of proper oversight and accountability in formal disciplinary investigations. Sinn Féin believes that only by achieving high standards of discipline based on honesty, integrity and transparency will a police service earn the confidence and support of the community. Without that confidence and support, all other aspects of policing are undermined. An effective system for disciplinary proceedings for misconduct when necessary and prosecutions for criminal behaviour where warranted are therefore an essential complement to the oversight mechanisms outlined. That is necessary for enforcing human rights compliance and ethical conduct standards.

The analysis of complaints, discipline and civil actions against the police provides important information for monitoring the PSNI's and the Garda's compliance with human rights and equality legislation and the European Convention on Human Rights in particular. Both the number and content of such complaints are an effective measure of the relationship between the police and the community and the efficacy of police policy and practice. Sinn Féin believes that less serious complaints, involving rude conduct or unprofessionalism, for example, should be resolved informally but, as stated previously, work needs to be done to ensure public faith in the process. Further, given that the Garda disciplinary regulations date back to 2007, it is clear they should be reviewed and updated where necessary.

During every discussion concerning Garda oversight and the Garda Inspectorate, the issue of not being able to carry out unannounced visits to Garda stations has arisen. That should be rectified as a matter of urgency and it should be noted that this report refers to a previous committee report that stated any protocol requiring advance notice of inspections should be removed by amending the Garda Síochána Act of 2005.

There is no barrier to doing so, bar the lack of political will to carry that out. That is just one legislative measure that is needed. We welcome the recommendations in the report stating that GSOC should be given enhanced powers in reviewing investigations and that measures must be taken to provide a penalty for failure by the Garda to deliver reports back to GSOC, as well as allowing GSOC a statutory framework in which it can report back to the Garda on systemic issues it may need to rectify. I urge the Minister to bring forward the inspection of places of detention Bill, which is on the legislative programme, to enable the ratification of the UN Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. It is accepted that different jurisdictions will be at different junctures in a process of developing police accountability and human rights compliance, and demands have been made from political representatives, activist groups and non-governmental organisations, including the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, which has said that we should look to the Six Counties in reducing the democratic deficit of police accountability. Regrettably, the Garda still cannot be held fully to account under the existing structures of accountability in the Twenty-six Counties. The gap between oversight structures North and South should be removed as a matter of urgency. The Nl Criminal Justice lnspectorate has been in place since 2002 and the matter should not be delayed any further. We welcome the report and its recommendations and look forward to the robust discussions that will take place during their implementation.

See this speech in context