Many factors will determine future shape of watchdog

THE breakdown in the relationship between the Garda Ombudsman and the Minister for Justice has deepened following Alan Shatter’s appearance at an Oireachtas committee on Wednesday evening.

Mr Shatter repeatedly attacked and questioned the decision-making of the GSOC leadership.

He cited a review — commissioned by his department — which he said contradicted the findings of the British security company used by GSOC to sweep its office.

The minister’s comments at the Oireachtas Public Service Oversight Committee came as his department and the Attorney General finalised the terms of reference of an independent inquiry into the whole affair.

The minister’s singular view of what happened at GSOC is a highly unusual context within which to establish an independent inquiry.

There is no reason to believe retired High Court judge John Cooke will be influenced in any way.

But of immediate concern is what is going on between the Minister for Justice and the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission.

Concerns had been expressed last week by garda sources regarding the basis upon which the ombudsman set up a public interest investigation to examine if the suspected surveillance of the office originated within the force and involved gardaí.

Mr Shatter told the committee there was “nothing to indicate” gardaí were involved at the time the investigation was set up.

He said the British security firm Verrimus had by that stage identified two anomalies, one concerning a possible breach of a wi-fi system and a second indicating a conference phone call facility was compromised.

Mr Shatter said it was “difficult to understand” why gardaí were suspects at that stage. He said there had to be “some basis” and that the attitude “we think it might be” was not enough.

The minister indicated it could reflect “anxiety” among GSOC members but said there was “no evidence, as opposed to feelings”.

Mr Shatter’s language was strong and portrays a lack of faith in, and respect for, the three-person commission that leads GSOC.

Not only that, he cited a review — commissioned by the Department of Justice — of Verrimus’s findings by Irish company Rits.

He said this review contested the findings of Verrimus regarding the three technical anomalies and concluded there was “no evidence at all” of surveillance.

Mr Shatter launched a strong attack on one of the commissioners, Kieran Fitzgerald. He described as “genuinely confusing” comments made by him at the committee last week in which he declined to say he exonerated gardaí from involvement.

Mr Shatter claimed those comments “helped add to the narrative that gardaí were engaged in some sort of surveillance”. He said he had “huge concerns” at the attitude of people being guilty until proven innocent.

He also expressed serious concern at the leak of a secret internal report — accessible by less then seven people — from within GSOC.

There’s a lot going on now which could have serious ramifications for GSOC; in terms of its reputation, powers, responsibilities and possibly its leadership.

Some of this seems to be going on behind the scenes. A lot of comments and claims are being made by Government and Garda sources, but it is unclear how it is all going to play out.

The critical attitude of the minister towards the GSOC leadership, the outcome of the internal GSOC investigation, the findings of the judicial inquiry and the results of a review of its powers and responsibilities, will determine what type of Garda watchdog we will have in the future.