Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

114. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality if he will establish a public inquiry into the death of a person (details supplied), as mandated by the Dáil on two separate occasions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12757/25]

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is my first opportunity to present oral questions to the Minister for Justice. I wanted my first question to be in respect of the case of Shane O'Farrell, with which the Minister is very familiar. The Minister moved a motion on the case previously, which was adopted by the House, calling for the establishment of a public inquiry into the circumstances of the death of Shane and the actions of State agencies in respect of it. Will the Minister now establish that inquiry?

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Carthy for tabling this question. I know how much pain the O’Farrell family have gone through since August 2011. Neither I, Deputy Carthy nor anyone else in the House can alleviate that pain, but what we can try to do is ensure that answers are provided to the O'Farrell family in respect of the issues of concern from that terrible evening.

It is important to emphasise that primary responsibility for Shane’s death rests with Zigimantas Gridziuska, the man who drove the car that struck Shane from behind, who failed to stop and remain at the scene and who subsequently that evening hid his car away from his home. As Deputy Carthy will be aware, he was prosecuted in February 2013 for dangerous driving causing death. He was acquitted. I know that is not the justice outcome that the O'Farrell family wanted but it is the consequence that we have to deal with and respond to. There were, however, issues of concern that I highlighted previously, as did Deputy Carthy. These were that the driver was on bail at the time, gardaí stopped his car one hour before the collision and he had previous convictions that should have triggered his reappearance before the courts. Those were the reasons I tabled that motion in June 2018. The motion was effective because it resulted in the Government changing its approach to the Shane O'Farrell matter and establishing a scoping inquiry. That inquiry took longer than most scoping inquiries and came back with a very lengthy report of 415 pages. This was much longer than I or anyone else expected. I cannot ignore the scoping report, but I will refer the recommendations contained within it to the justice committee, once that committee is up and running. I will keep my mind open in respect of the matter and the question the Deputy asked, but I cannot give him a definitive answer now.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree entirely with the Minister that one person alone is responsible for the death of Shane O'Farrell, that being, Zigimantas Gridziuska. However, at the heart of this case is the indisputable fact that Gridziuska should have been imprisoned at the time of Shane's killing. He was in breach of multiple bail conditions set by multiple courts. He had been stopped on several occasions by gardaí when there was an arrestable offence clearly taking place, including just a short time before Shane's death. The Minister has indicated that the O'Farrell family want answers. It is in the public interest that we get to the heart of why this individual was not imprisoned at the time. How do we get those answers for the O'Farrells? It is my belief that the only way those answers will be got is through an independent public inquiry. Does the Minister believe that there is scope or capacity within the justice committee to actually get those answers? I would contend strongly that there is not. If the Minister shares this view, then he should do the honourable thing and not delay this process any longer and establish the public inquiry that is required.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy has highlighted the issues of concern and he has correctly pointed out that not just the O'Farrell family, but the public is entitled to answers on these. The Deputy mentioned that the driver was on bail on charges of theft and possession of stolen property at the time of the collision. The Deputy also mentioned that Gridziuska's convictions for those theft offences in May 2011 should have triggered his reappearance before the courts. I cannot ignore the fact that, in the scoping exercise report, those issues were dealt with. I fully agree with the Deputy that I do not expect the justice committee to start conducting inquisitorial hearings. It cannot do so. I was on the justice committee as a member and as Chairman. However, what the justice committee can do when I send it the report is to look at the recommendations that are contained within. The Deputy and many others may not like the content of the replies provided in the scoping report, but they have to be considered. I come back to the point that I cannot ignore a report of 415 pages, but we need to have further engagement on it. The recommendations need to be assessed by the justice committee. I will keep an open mind on the Deputy's principal question.

Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are two distinct elements here. One is the recommendations of the scoping exercise report. I agree that we should look at all of those and perhaps there is a role for the justice committee in deliberating on whether those are achievable. Every recommendation ultimately comes down to whether the Minister or another Minister decides to accept them. One of the recommendations is that there is no scope for a public inquiry. I fundamentally disagree with that recommendation. Just like any recommendation in any report, it can be discounted by the Minister if there is a just reason to do so. In my view, there is very just reason to ignore that recommendation and to pursue the democratic decision of the Dáil and establish the inquiry.

If the Minister decides to proceed with what I consider to be another stumbling block by reverting this issue to the justice committee, will he instruct his Department and An Garda Síochána to provide the justice committee with any documentation it seeks as part of its work in following up on any examination of this case and the report?

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not want to interfere with what the justice committee wants to do, but if a request comes from it to my Department, I will ensure that careful consideration is given to it.

I have to make a broader point on scoping inquiries and reports. Generally, when there is a proposal in the House to establish a commission of investigation or a tribunal of inquiry, a scoping report is done in advance. We did it with the allegations of sexual abuse in schools, where Mary O'Toole SC prepared the scoping inquiry report. It took about three or four months and comprised around 40 pages. She said that there needed to be an investigation into those matters because she was not able to establish the detail of it. However, the scoping report we are discussing is different and I cannot ignore the fact that it says that there should be no further inquiry. I fully understand and appreciate the Deputy's political objective but he has to understand that other people could quite legitimately say to me that I was told not to set up a further inquiry.

I am keeping the matter open, but I cannot ignore the content of the scoping report.