Garda/Ombudsman Row in relation to Kieran Boylan Explained by Sunday Times Journo

jonsnow

Absolutely superb transcript of conversation on last nights Late Debate on RTE which gives his fascinating view into what is really happening with this high profile row where the GSOC has accussed the Gardai of stalling on handing over relevant documentation for years, of not cooperating and of not following post morris systems for handling informers.Gives a chilling insight on how cadres of "elite" officers use their positions to cultivate high level drug dealing informers who they then cooperate with to arrest less favoured drugdealers and underlings in order to insure further promotions for themselves.

Mr Mooney is the Journalist who brought the whole fiasco to public attention and forced the GSOC investigation in the first place so he knows what he is talking about.

Well past time the Ombudsmans powers and remit were expanded so that unsavoury practices at management level can be rooted out and not just bad behaviour by junior gardai. The really serious stuff is happening in relation to these "elite" units who cite national security in relation to absolutely everything and brazenly stall and flat out refuse to follow orders to hand over relevant documentation to the GSOC.

If we are serious about Garda oversight then its time we trusted senior officers in the GSOC and gave them the same access to the national security documents that senior Gardai have. Otherwise they will always operate in the dark in relation to the really serious matters not involving some drunk junior off-duty guard punching someone on cctv.

Transcript here:


http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/05/10/black-ops-being-run-off-the-books/

Last night, Sunday Times investigative journalist John Mooney joined Senator Jillian Van Turnout, Sinéad Ryan, consumer columnist with The Herald, and John Byrne, social care lecturer at Waterford Institute of Technology, on RTÉ’s Late Debate.

Fergal Keane was standing in for the show’s usual host Audrey Carville.
Keane and his panel discussed the Garda Ombudsman public interest inquiry into the relationship between convicted drug dealer Kieran Boylan (above), whose charges were mysteriously dropped in 2008, and certain members of the gardaí.

In the course of their conversation, Mr Mooney, who has been at the forefront of this story since it began, said Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan (top right), had questions to answer. He also said Justice Minister Alan Shatter, (top left), was politically compromised.

Fergal Keane: “John Mooney, this is some pretty extraordinary statements there by the Garda Ombudsman who were there given oversight of the gardaí, saying the gardaí didn’t cooperate with them, didn’t give them information. It’s an incredible state of affairs. And very, very serious?”

John Mooney: “Well, it’s not for anyone who’s familiar with the story. I began investigating Kieran Boylan’s activities…”

Keane: “Who is this alleged informant.”

Mooney: “He’s not an informant. He was an international drug trafficker who was operating in the State, between here, Britain, Northern Ireland and Holland, and Spain at one stage. This individual entered into a relationship with a handful of guards. That was unknown to anyone. So there’s a lot duplicity going on at the moment and a lot of, sort of, lots of people running for cover, particularly in the Government, because very senior figures within the Government screamed very loudly, over the years, about what was happening with this case.”

Keane: “Pat Rabbitte being one?”

Mooney: “Yeah, Brendan Howlin, Enda Kenny himself actually. There were, the late Tony Gregory was very instrumental in highlighting this case. We began looking at this individual back in 2005, when I heard about his arrest with €2million worth of cocaine and heroin and he’d made certain claims, while in custody, he was on bail for a previous offence, he’d been caught with almost €1million worth of drugs, again heroin and cocaine being imported into the State. He seemed to have, he was suggesting at the time that he had high-level contacts within the guards. I didn’t actually believe the story but we commenced an inquiry into…”

Keane: “He made these claims in court?”

Mooney: “No, no, he never…this never got to court unfortunately. He suggested this while in custody with the Garda National Drugs Unit who were part of an international operation, to take him out. He was part of a cartel operating between here and Manchester and with various other major players in the drugs trade in, in mainland Europe. And this guy was involved in transporting huge quantities of drugs. You’re not talking about a couple of kilos of heroin, ones every so often, we’re talking about mega consignments of heroin. So he’s an individual, under any policing operation, who cannot fit into an informant category. People don’t understand. the legislation surrounding this and they don’t understand the rules governing this. The idea of police informants is not to recruit people, who instigate crime and traffick drugs into countries, and destroy communities and everything else. They try get people, who’ve no knowledge of it. But this guy was an instigator, and quite a wealthy individual. So he was caught, the charges were dropped. We highlighted the case, the charges were reinstated. And then, famously, in the last day of a hearing in, what was it, two years ago, in an unannounced, an unscheduled case, the charges were dropped against him. The only way that ended up in the public domain was because I happened to be in…”

Keane: “Ok..on the last day of the court sittings in July 2008.”

Mooney: “Nine. Yes, that was it. And Kieran would have had various choice words with me outside the court that evening, as a result of that. But, we’d subsequently…”

Keane: “Where is he now?”

Mooney: “He’s living in county Louth at the moment. And he, then we, as the investigation commenced, continued, we, as you’re probably are aware, revealed that he’d managed to obtain an international haulage licence, on the basis of paperwork that said that he didn’t even have a criminal record, again provided by garda headquarters. There were other allegations, he had his passport changed into his Irish name, which allowed him to travel internationally without…”

Keane: “Ok, you highlighted all of this. The gardaí…It prompted the Garda Ombudsman to start an investigation…”

Mooney: “A public interest inquiry.”

Keane: “We now have this today.”

Mooney: “Yeah.”

Keane: “A couple of years into the investigation. What’s going on between the Garda Ombudsman and the garda management?”

Mooney: “Well, I suppose…”

Keane: “Because the Garda Commissioner has come out and denied there is any wrongdoing and the person, the judge who’s charged with overlooking the handling of the performance, has also said that they were more or less in line with regulations.”

Mooney: “Ok. Well there’s two issues. Number one, the judge’s report only concerns the legal operation of CHIS (Covert Human Intelligence System) which people who are regulated and registered and fall in within the controls of that system. There’s nothing wrong with informants. And if this guy was an informant, I wouldn’t be writing about him. We deal with lots of different issues.”

Keane: “Well the Garda Commissioner seems to be taking quite a bit of comfort from that finding this evening.”

Mooney: “That’s just pure guff. You…The second issue concerning what’s happening at the moment is there’s a lot being made about the DPP not pressing charges. The reason why the DPP isn’t pressing charges is because they can’t put this information into the public domain. There may be other information entering the public domain quite shortly about why charges weren’t preferred and sort of the other favours that were done for, how would I say, that Kieran Boylan availed of, courtesy of the State.”

Keane: “Ok. So how do you characterise now what’s going on this evening?”

Mooney: “Well, I think…”

Keane: “Because there were extraordinary words from the person given responsibility for overlooking the…”

Mooney: “I think there’s a number of issues going on. I think Alan Shatter is politically compromised because he gave Martin Callinan a two-year extension when this was known…”

Keane: “Martin Callinan being the Garda Commissioner..”

Mooney: “…that this was coming down the line. Martin Callinan was a director of operations at crucial times over the unit which were involved in all of this..”

Keane: “OK, well we’re not suggesting in anyway that he had any personal involvement.”

Mooney: “No, no, but, in terms of, he has a responsibility towards this. So you have a situation where the reason why the Commission is not seeking disciplinary, I suppose, procedures against the handful of gardaí involved is because there’s no real point. Garda headquarters have known about this. They’ve protected these people and, indeed, one of them – after this case – was trotted out in the media ad nauseum actually promoting one of the people involved. So they took a decision to, under all, they did not want it coming into the public domain that there were these kind of black operations being run off the books.”

Keane: “Yeah but John, like this. My memory, going back a long way, is par for the course between the gardaí and whoever is there to investigate them, going back to the garda complaints commission, it was just a fiasco from day one. They have opposed the Garda Commissioner all the way along the line…the Garda Ombudsman should I say…”

Mooney: “Yeah, well I think, I think there’s a number of issues for Martin Callinan. Martin Callinan told the public that there was excellent cooperation between garda headquarters and the Garda Ombudsman’s office and I think the truth of that relationship has actually been really, really laid bare.”

Keane: “But, as you said, you know, that could be just PR spin from his point of view this evening.”

Jillian Van Turnhout: “But like the Garda Ombudsman…”

Keane: “Jillian Van Turnhout.”

Jillian Van Turnhout: “Sorry, just listening to that quote on the Garda Ombudsman talking about ‘significant deficiencies’ in the Garda. You know that, that for me rings an alarm bell to note, that he’s even…”

Keane: “Even if we get away from the details of the case, of this particular case.”

Van Turnhout: “He’s saying that this is wider than this case.”

Mooney: “This, this all goes down to, there is a convicted drug trafficker caught with €1.7million worth of heroin and cocaine which was being sold. He admitted responsibility for that, yet he never stood trial. What does he know that unfortunately has this State in a situation where they can’t put him in jail?”

Keane: “Jillian.”

Van Turnhout: “Yeah, yeah, that’s and listening there to the Garda Ombudsman and that he feels that there’s other significant deficiencies beyond this case..you know..I’m asking myself the questions, of what the ramifications, what ramifications…”

Keane: “That’s what I was thinking aswell.”

Van Turnhout: “Yeah. What ramifications are there. That’s, for me, obviously you have this case but what else is there?”

Keane: “John Byrne?”

Byrne: “I’m feeling a little bit conflicted Fergal because part of me wants to say that we should trust the guards to do the policing and we should trust their judgement in that, mindful of the fact that, you know, that there have been some cases in the past, where they’ve maybe, they haven’t dealt with things as well as they could have.”

Keane: “One thinks of Donegal?”

Byrne: “Sure, sure, and the guards are, are normal people, the same as everybody else and they do have their vulnerabilities, some of them will behave in a way that is without integrity, that’s true. But the vast, vast majority of the 11 or 12,000 guards are absolutely upstanding citizens who are trying to do the very best that they can in very, very difficult circumstances…”

Keane: “But his is an extraordinary situation we find ourselves in tonight.”

Byrne: “It is but it seems to me that there’s a wider issue. And that’s the culture that exists in the gardaí in relation to its cooperation or lack of with the ombudsman commission, on any issue. To get away from the specifics of this particular case, I spoke to a number of guards recently, in relation to the Association of Garda Sergeants issue and the walkout there. And what they said to me was that, ironically, they weren’t perhaps as angry with Alan Shatter as they were with Michael McDowell for the implementation of the Garda Siochana Act in 2005 and the establishment of the whole ombudsman commission thing because what the gardaí are telling me is that they’re afraid almost to do their job. One guard said to me that the safest thing for her to do would be not to arrest anybody at all because of the fear that whatever way they turn, whatever they do, they’re damned if they do, they’re damned if they don’t.”

Keane: “We are all.”

Talk over each other.
Keane: “We are all in that situation where we have regulations.”

Byrne: “Regulation. Absolutely, we need regulation, we need independent regulation but not to the point where it creates a culture of fear within the guards, that they say…”

Talk over each other.

Mooney: “I really feel compelled to butt in on that sort of stuff, because anyone who’s familiar with this sort of issue, you get people coming out with this sort of stuff and if you don’t mind me saying so, it really is guff. There’s a young lad in prison tonight that Kieran Boylan supplied with drugs, a few, couple of years ago, who was in debt. And who was asked to go collect a shipment of drugs. And got a ten-year mandatory sentence. His name is Andrew Kearns. I understand his solicitors will be proceeding to court shortly to try and sort out what happened to him. This is not about having a go at guards or something. I work with a couple of guards every day of the week. These individuals are organised crime networks that operate. They’ve an incredible amount of influence because of the money that they have and the potential that they have to allow gardaí to get up the promotion system very, very quickly, by setting up drug dealers, or other drug dealers, setting up lower people that don’t pose a threat to them and that sort of contact between police officers and criminals is notoriously fraught right across the world. Now, Ireland, unlike every other country, in Western Europe has, does not take this sort of issue seriously. And we’ve suffered as a result, in the past. The Morris Tribunal, I was a witness in it and know all about it. It cost this State and the taxpayers €60million to run that, to sort out the shenanigans that was going on.”

Keane: “There was no..how many investigations, over the years, how many inquiries, tribunals have we had into gardaí?”

Mooney: “But sure, countless. I mean nothing. Like, if you’re a guard and you’re caught doing something wrong, you will suffer the consequences, if you’re in uniform rank or something like that. But if you go up the ranks slightly and you’re involved in sort of various other activities that can’t be kind of, they’re ethically unsound to put it mildly that can involve all sorts of fun and games that cross the border of illegality and criminality, usually nothing ever happens to you. I know. I’ve been dealing with them for years.”


The Garda Press Office Approved spin here:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gardai-accuse-watchdog-of-smoke-screen-in-fouryear-collusion-probe-29255493.html

FatherLen

tl;dr!!

jonsnow

FatherLen wrote: »

tl;dr!!

Thank you for that helpful concise post. Unfortunately as its a transcript which makes the context of the comments important I dont really see anyway of shortening it.Have a nice day:D

lkionm

Needs more dragons and boobs

Cody Pomeray

Heard this exchange on Late Debate (massively under-appreciated show btw) and I was really taken by it.

John Mooney is the greatest investigative journalist in Ireland bar none.

It's healthy to see the Ombudsman criticise An Garda Síochána, but lets be frank, their only criticism relates to delay in getting documents.

The Garda Ombudsman has also decided that no Gardaí should face disciplinary action. I would put a lot of trust in John Mooney's opinion, and although there is no evidence of wrongdoing, this entire story is too stink to be allowed let fade into the archives.

hatrickpatrick

If the ombudsman is to truly have the proper powers to oversee the Gardai, in my view there should be consequences for not handing over files within an agreed timeframe. As was mentioned on Prime Time last night, oversight by consent is obviously very important and is definitely the best way an oversight system can work - the issue here is that when that fails, when those being investigated refused to co-operate, what then?
Should it not be a provision of the Garda Act that if a timeframe of 30 days is agreed, then any delay beyond that without a seriously good explanation is an offense, or at the very least an official breach of discipline which can be penalized?

It seems astounding to me that any public body can take more than a year to (and in one case, apparently, never) hand over documents when the agreement clearly states a time limit of 30 days - shouldn't someone be held accountable for that? If it went on longer than 30 days without good reason, then someone broke the rules. Surely rule breaking should be met with sanction of some kind?

As an aside, the "tl;dr" comment above and the lack of replies to this thread concern me - not because of someone not wanting to read a long document, that's understandable, but because the fact that our democratic system of overseeing our police force and making sure they're operating within the rules is being obstructed by that police force doesn't seem to concern more people? The Ombudsman are there to make sure the Gardai follow their own rules and the law when dealing with us, the people - I'm a bit surprised that allegations of non compliance with it aren't causing more of a stir.

tl;dr version - if I was being investigated by a body with the power to oversee that I'm doing my job and doing it within the rules, and I refused to give them files that they asked for as part of their investigation, I'd expect to be in major sh!t for that legally speaking. Should it not be clearly spelled out with the law that complying with an ombudsman investigation is a legal obligation?

smash

I got so bored... surely there's a short version of what was said?

Cody Pomeray

I would consider this to sum up Mooney's contribution:

These individuals are organised crime networks that operate. They’ve an incredible amount of influence because of the money that they have and the potential that they have to allow gardaí to get up the promotion system very, very quickly, by setting up drug dealers, or other drug dealers, setting up lower people that don’t pose a threat to them and that sort of contact between police officers and criminals is notoriously fraught right across the world. Now, Ireland, unlike every other country, in Western Europe has, does not take this sort of issue seriously.

SB2013

FatherLen wrote: »

tl;dr!!

Think The Shield when Vic Mackey made an unofficial deal with a big drug dealer to get dirt on other dealers and lower down dealers.

What interests me is that The Ombudsman claim that reports were delayed for up to two months yet it took them four years to finish the investigation, eventually finding no wrong doing. Seems a bit of a gap.

Anyway, if there is any evidence of this there should be an enquiry. The idea of dealing with the big criminals to catch the lower ones is something that turns my stomach.

JustAThought

Agreed with everything the OP said - particularly about the lack of concern re Ombudsman . My experience has been that the guards Act and feel like they are untouchable , and KNOWING that there is a REQUIREMENT for investigators of the ombudsman to Be or have been a gaurd- as advertised in the official Public Jobs advert online and in The Irish Times in 2012 does NOTHING for the G. Ombudsman's " reputation" other than the general disinterest and distain people seem to hold it in.

Even the guards sneer At it - by their ( the ombudsman s) own admission they do not require any particular protocol or methodology from the guards in dealing with even basic handling of basic issues; and if after 6 months of trying to deal with gAurds you try and MAKE a complaint with the ombudsman it is by then " too late" and they will not accept it and so it will never even show up in their statisitics.

The organisation is an old boys shop for the gaurds & has no teeth or credibility.

And if senior civil servants / gAurds act and behave as if it is a talking shop with no -one to make them comply with its statute based requirements then what is the point of having it at all - they seem to have simply ignored it or acted as though it did not exist in this case. Says much about it's power, independence or value.

Ava_e

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

I would consider this to sum up Mooney's contribution:

And what an enlightening contribution it is. Something is very rotten here and I'm glad Mooney is shedding some light on it.

SB2013

JustAThought wrote: »

KNOWING that there is a REQUIREMENT for investigators of the ombudsman to Be or have been a gaurd- as advertised in the official Public Jobs advert online and in The Irish Times in 2012

Have you a link to this? I'm pretty sure there are a number of them who have not got this background.

EDIT: The booklet I found said they have to have experience in a police force, not specifically the Gardaí.

squod

FatherLen wrote: »

tl;dr!!

Garda Call of duty - black ops2

JustAThought

SB2013 wrote: »

Have you a link to this? I'm pretty sure there are a number of them who have not got this background.

EDIT: The booklet I found said they have to have experience in a police force, not specifically the Gardaí.

I have the ad under my pile of stuff in my room. Sub scribe to Irish Times & you will get the link thought the archives.

As for " a " police force that excuses nothing - I misremember the exact wording but a national institute hat requires the investigators to have served in a National Police Force to qualify to apply is a joke . Jobs only for serving or retiring gaurds to investigate gaurds. A national joke. And the gaurds know this and laugh up their sleeves at it.

And the national - government endorsed - recruitment agency " public jobs" not only allows it but stands over this as an officially sanctioned and approved condition of being eligible to apply for the job of investigating corruption & misbehaviour in the gaurds.

No wonder the senior gaurds in this case just ignore & disregard the "Ombudsman" .

Cody Pomeray

JustAThought wrote: »

Jobs only for serving or retiring gaurds to investigate gaurds. A national joke. And the gaurds know this and laugh up their sleeves at it.

This just confirms my fears that Gardaí have a terrible sense of humour tbh.

beans

Let's hope he doesn't get himself two to the head

SB2013

JustAThought wrote: »

I have the ad under my pile of stuff in my room. Sub scribe to Irish Times & you will get the link thought the archives.

As for " a " police force that excuses nothing - I misremember the exact wording but a national institute hat requires the investigators to have served in a National Police Force to qualify to apply is a joke . Jobs only for serving or retiring gaurds to investigate gaurds. A national joke. And the gaurds know this and laugh up their sleeves at it.

And the national - government endorsed - recruitment agency " public jobs" not only allows it but stands over this as an officially sanctioned and approved condition of being eligible to apply for the job of investigating corruption & misbehaviour in the gaurds.

No wonder the senior gaurds in this case just ignore & disregard the "Ombudsman" .

Again, like i said, it's open to all former police officers from all countries and has quite a few from different jurisdictions. And it'd be a bit pointless having investigators with no experience of investigating. But I can see you are intent on having a rant wether you are right or worng so I'll let you at it.

J K

Oh sh1t we found no evidence of wrong doing.

What am I getting paid for?
How do I justify my existence?

Oh we've found evidence of documents being handed over not on time!

jonsnow

JustAThought wrote: »

I have the ad under my pile of stuff in my room. Sub scribe to Irish Times & you will get the link thought the archives.

As for " a " police force that excuses nothing - I misremember the exact wording but a national institute hat requires the investigators to have served in a National Police Force to qualify to apply is a joke . Jobs only for serving or retiring gaurds to investigate gaurds. A national joke. And the gaurds know this and laugh up their sleeves at it.

And the national - government endorsed - recruitment agency " public jobs" not only allows it but stands over this as an officially sanctioned and approved condition of being eligible to apply for the job of investigating corruption & misbehaviour in the gaurds.

No wonder the senior gaurds in this case just ignore & disregard the "Ombudsman" .

My understanding is that the GSOC recruits ex-police officers that have served in A national police force - not necessarily AGS.My understanding is that they have investigators from the UK, australia, spain, czech republic, etc etc.

I believe that in the early days they had no ex-AGS even though there was nothing stopping them as they didnt want the impression of being a Garda Complaints Board joke Mark 2. However my understanding is that they have eased this restriction somewhat in recent years. I am not too concerned about a smattering of ex-guards as it has certain advantages i.e. know the culture etc etc but if they start quietly refilling all the investigator slots then we will have spent a lot of money in place to have come full circle.

In relation to ex-police from other jurisdictions policing the police this is the only logical step. Who else can investigate crime except seasoned crime investigators - you cant exactly send teachers in!!. While there might be some residual all boys in blue worries in reality all the outsiders policed in very different organisations and dont have the same close ties or loyalty to the gardai that they are investigating that ex guards would.

I would also imagine that the hostile and dismissive way that they are treated by many gardai i.e. that they are not "real" crime investigators with "real police powers" has squelched any warm fuzzy feelings that they woild have toward the gardai they are investigating.

hatrickpatrick

J K wrote: »

Oh sh1t we found no evidence of wrong doing.

What am I getting paid for?
How do I justify my existence?

Oh we've found evidence of documents being handed over not on time!

One document was never handed over at all. The inquiry dragged on for four years because of such delays.

Does the phrase "obstructing the course of justice" not come to mind?

JustAThought

SB2013 wrote: »

Again, like i said, it's open to all former police officers from all countries and has quite a few from different jurisdictions. And it'd be a bit pointless having investigators with no experience of investigating. But I can see you are intent on having a rant wether you are right or worng so I'll let you at it.

As you are a gaurd I hardly expect A balanced or an impartial response from you.

Hardly a rant - you must lead a sheltered
Life.

jonsnow

J K wrote: »

Oh sh1t we found no evidence of wrong doing.

What am I getting paid for?
How do I justify my existence?

Oh we've found evidence of documents being handed over not on time!

Hard to find evidence of wrondoing when Gardai are running highlevel drugdealing informers in a off the books undocumented ad hoc manner in breach of post morris professional guidelines. Hard to know whats really going on when nothings being properly documented.

Plenty of concern as well with taking up to 4 years to hand over documents (well most of them) which should be handed over in 30 days after the minister has to personally have a meeting with top ranking gardai to flat out tell them that they are handing over the documents as they are legally required to.

Do you really believe that the way AGS handled the Kieran Boylan case was professional. Lots to be improved on here. Lets give GSOC the teeth to really investigate the guards instead of this halfassed approach we are taking.

onerone

Usa tried to take control of the biggest heroin producing country in the world afghanistan, they failed just death and rubble left over and more heroin than ever coming out of afghanistan. in countries like iran and columbia lawyers and cops are shot all the time, trying to do the right thing, more pride and all that gay stuff. in the west however people are all like whats the point. show me the money.

SB2013

JustAThought wrote: »

As you are a gaurd I hardly expect A balanced or an impartial response from you.

Hardly a rant - you must lead a sheltered
Life.

I take it you have no response to the points I made so.

Cody Pomeray

onerone wrote: »

Usa tried to take control of the biggest heroin producing country in the world afghanistan, they failed just death and rubble left over and more heroin than ever coming out of afghanistan. in countries like iran and columbia lawyers and cops are shot all the time, trying to do the right thing, more pride and all that gay stuff. in the west however people are all like whats the point. show me the money.

WELL SAID.

Chuck Stone

What an expensive fucking farce prohibition is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUvO2O7Iazw

jonsnow

heres the 7 page summary report by the Ombudsman. Its excellent if a tad overlong for the tldr merchants.

For those stating that because there was no dpp indictments and no disciplinary action taken this means that there was no corruption etc. the report also says the gardai didnt keep proper notes in breach of agreed protocols so its very hard to prove anything in those circumstances.

http://gardaombudsman.ie/GSOC/Report...ion_102(4).PDF

hatrickpatrick

jonsnow wrote: »

heres the 7 page summary report by the Ombudsman. Its excellent if a tad overlong for the tldr merchants.

For those stating that because there was no dpp indictments and no disciplinary action taken this means that there was no corruption etc. the report also says the gardai didnt keep proper notes in breach of agreed protocols so its very hard to prove anything in those circumstances.

http://gardaombudsman.ie/GSOC/Report_investigation_public_interest_section_102(4).PDF

Either your browser or Boards butchered that PDF link, here's the real one:
http://gardaombudsman.ie/GSOC/Report_investigation_public_interest_section_102(4).PDF

jonsnow

Pretty Lengthy Letter in todays Irish Times.Cant say I agree with a lot of it but some good points made also

http://www.irishtimes.com/debate/letters/garda-row-with-watchdog-1.1391915

Sir, – I note your coverage of a dispute between the Office of the Garda Ombudsman, and the Garda Commissioner about unfettered access to confidential Garda records (Conor Lally, Front page, May 10th) .
I have consistently pressed for greater public access to once-sensitive official records.

However, with contemporary Garda records very serious issues arise. As well as the confidentiality and security of individuals and procedures, these relate to the very act of securing intelligence which has always been crucial to the thwarting of criminal and subversive activities which threaten the State and its citizens.

Danger lies not simply in a single unfortunate leak of material, but in the possibility that it might prove more difficult in future for the gardaí, the Customs Service or other agencies to persuade people to act as informants if secrecy could not be absolutely guaranteed. Such legitimate considerations have to be put in the scales, even where suspicion exists that individual gardaí may adduce them as a way to hide wrongdoing.
There must be a means, perhaps by asking a judge to review the relevant Garda material, by which this matter can be safely and fairly resolved without conceding the dangerous principle that the Office of the Garda Ombudsman can have “unfettered access” to the Garda databases. Such a right would, however honourably operated, inevitably lead essentially to fishing expeditions by investigators and could compromise the security of the State’s most sensitive records.

Finally, I hope during this controversy the members of the Garda Ombudsman Commission will continue to operate in decent obscurity, unlike some of their analogues in other spheres of the public sector. Ombudsmen are there solely to serve the public good, not to promote themselves. – Yours, etc,

Prof EUNAN O’HALPIN,
Centre for Contemporary
Irish History,
Trinity College Dublin,
Dublin 2.

hatrickpatrick

^ The problem is that when the Ombudsman opens an investigation, sometimes it's a criminal investigation into a criminal matter. Under those circumstances, to withhold information is tantamount to deliberately attempting to obstruct the course of justice.
Maybe a system in which, like the police themselves, the Ombudsman can automatically seize documents if they get a search warrant empowering them to do so?

If the Ombudsman doesn't have the same powers to investigate the police as the police have to investigate others, it can never be any sort of true authority or oversight of them. To object to the Ombudsman's right to inspect such documents is effectively to dismiss the concept that we need an independent body to ensure that law enforcement itself is following the law.

jonsnow

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

^ The problem is that when the Ombudsman opens an investigation, sometimes it's a criminal investigation into a criminal matter. Under those circumstances, to withhold information is tantamount to deliberately attempting to obstruct the course of justice.
Maybe a system in which, like the police themselves, the Ombudsman can automatically seize documents if they get a search warrant empowering them to do so?

If the Ombudsman doesn't have the same powers to investigate the police as the police have to investigate others, it can never be any sort of true authority or oversight of them. To object to the Ombudsman's right to inspect such documents is effectively to dismiss the concept that we need an independent body to ensure that law enforcement itself is following the law.

Exactly.There are 13000 Gardai with access to the pulse system any of whom could leak that information.Are we seriously suggesting that allowing a couple of dozen ex-cops from other jurisdictions and a handful of other responsible professionals access to that database is going to be such a catastrophe.

In relation to national security and oversight of the elite squads that operate in the dark corners of our state. That is precisely the kind of areas where the most damage and serious police corruption would occur and is precisely where the most civilian oversight is needed. Obviously access should be strictly controlled to a limited number of senior GSOC officers on a need to know basis i.e. the same as the guards. But I would have just as much trust in senior GSOC officers as I would in any highly placed garda officer.

jonsnow

Ombudsman backs Garda Ombudsman

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ombudsman-wants-clarity-on-claims-gardai-colluded-with-drug-trafficker-29266242.html

OMBUDSMAN Emily O'Reilly has called for more light to be shone on allegations that elite Garda officers colluded with a convicted drug trafficker.

Ms O'Reilly, Ireland's information commissioner, said the public has been left "really puzzled" by the lack of details about the Kieran Boylan case.
"I personally don't feel that as yet there has been a full expose of all the issues involved, within the media," she said.

Last week, the independent watchdog responsible for investigating Garda wrong-doing launched an astonishing attack on the force, accusing it of withholding vital evidence from its inquiry into the affair.

The Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission (Gsoc) probed claims a specialist unit within the force turned a blind-eye to Boylan's drug dealing in exchange for information on other dealers.

The watchdog said its four year inquiry into why serious drug trafficking charges against Boylan were suddenly dropped without any explanation in 2008 was hampered and delayed by a lack of co-operation.

Ms O'Reilly, who is responsible for investigating complaints against public bodies but not the Garda, said there was an onus on all involved in the case to give more clarity about what exactly happened.
"Because they are very, very important matters," she said.
"Obviously we have to take Gsoc seriously. Clearly we also have to take the Gardai and the Department of Justice seriously as well, but I just feel, as a citizen, that we haven't got to the nub of it yet.
"I think a lot of people are really puzzled as to where the truth lies in relation to this, and I think the media has a responsibility, actually, to perhaps dig a little deeper into this for the sake of clarity for the public."
Ms O'Reilly made the remarks while launching her annual report.

hatrickpatrick

^ Does it surprise you that this hasn't got more attention, both in the media and in terms of Boards, Twitter etc - general national conversation?
I'm honestly a little puzzled and worried that the fact that the Gardai refused to hand over information to a public interest inquiry into whether they had (a) misbehaved in terms of their guidelines, and (b) actually broken the law, isn't being met with more outrage than it is. If this investigation had got to the stage of court proceedings, the same behavior would be regarded as contempt of court.

jonsnow

yeah I thought it was going to be a major sh testorm given that its the most serious investigation by the Ombudsman since the organisation was set up and it involved some seriously murky stuff. It resulted in a massive blowup between the GRA and the GSOC and the GSOC basically said that we found no wrongdoing but as proper documents are not being kept as per Morris CHIP guidelines then it is very hard to know. They are asking for an expanded remit and powers.

I have been very surprised by the lack of interest both in the media and generally. The Ombudsman seemed to have timed the release of there findinds in a manner which caught the Gardai (and possibly the DOJ off balance).I think because they have been so compliant over the years the gardai didnt expect the strength of their objections and recommendations. The most media savvy of the ombudsman was out making his case on Primetime on the day of the release of the report and came across well. The times did a pretty comprehensive coverage on the friday and the garda fightback began with their pet reporter Paul Williams giving there slant in the Indo and downplaying it. Then nothing in any of the Sunday Papers (even John Mooney had nothing) over the weekend.

For whatever reason this story never caught on and given that the whole appartus that we have put in place to keep on top of rogue gardai in the most sensitive positions has been questioned by the very people charged with running it it should be a bigger story. The penalty points scandal garners huge attention but to my mind is not anywhere near as serious as what is at stake here.

I think that there is no real media pressure on Shatter now and he will quietly shelve any real reform of keeping tabs on the really important happening in the states security branch.

jonsnow

Conor Brady reachs similar conclusions to myself. Shatter is at a crossroads and has to either expand the powers and remit of GSOC or he might as well shut up shop and we might as well save some money by openly admitting that we are back to guards investigating guards. A few interesting highlights:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/time-for-shatter-to-call-shots-on-garda-watchdog-1.1399368?page=2

The Garda believes it has an overriding obligation to maintain the confidentiality of intelligence sources. The commission has a statutory duty to investigate allegations of wrongdoing in the force. It cannot discharge that duty at any serious level without access to information.
Without commenting on the case currently at issue, it is important to recall that in every instance in which systemic wrongdoing has been revealed in the Garda Síochána down the decades, it
has been cloaked by the invocation of confidentiality and security.


In Donegal, an unregulated intelligence regime led to the gross corruptions uncovered by the Morris tribunal. At its heart, a cohort of unscrupulous gardaí advanced their own ends, using security as their cover. The commission was not set up as ornamentation.


.
The Oireachtas established the commission as an oversight body to prevent this happening again. It was given, effectively, the same powers as the Garda. Its three commissioners were to be invested at the highest level of authority that the State can provide; nominated by Government, approved by the Dáil and Seanad and appointed by the president. The legislation envisaged that sharing of information between the two agencies in the State with police powers would be the norm.

It is significant that the only ground for the withholding of information from the commission and the application of such restrictions is that of State security. But no such consideration has been raised, at least publicly, in relation to the current issues between the commission and the Garda. They concern drugs trafficking.

Solemn assurances were given by the Garda authorities to Government and to the Oireachtas that henceforth these would be strictly adhered to. The commission’s investigation now at issue sought to establish, inter alia, if there was any validity to the allegations made (by some Dáil deputies among others) that the FitzGerald rules were being sidelined.
There have been some worrying straws in the wind. In July 2011, Mr Justice Barry White, presiding at what was dubbed the “Grumpy Jack’s” murder trial, was severely critical of gardaí for running an informant “off the books”, contrary to the FitzGerald rules.

There are a number of issues here and it is important that the good faith and genuine concerns of those involved should be recognised. But if trust cannot be developed between the two agencies, the ombudsman commission can never fulfil its mandate beyond investigating petty allegations against low-ranking gardaí.

Perhaps this is now what is wanted. The political establishment may now feel it went too far in establishing the Garda Ombudsman Commission as it is constituted. Some might prefer to go back to having the guards investigating the guards a s before. At least it would be more honest.

Hootanany

It will be shoved under the counter as usual cant be distracting are boys in blue can we.