GSOC failed to supply Guerin review with data

The Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission did not supply Seán Guerin with any documentation for his review, meaning he could not form a considered view of how it investigated the cases highlighted by the whistleblowers.

The organisation was criticised by Mr Guerin but has sought to defend itself by claiming that, while it knew he had a set number of weeks to complete his report, it was unaware “of the exact fixed deadline date”.

However, he found that, in the one case GSOC saw through to completion, it took broadly the same approach as adopted by gardaí. That led him to conclude that while GSOC’s independent investigative function is important, “it appears to be no guarantee of a different disciplinary outcome”.

Mr Guerin said what was “striking” was that, “in the one case in which it is clear that a GSOC investigation was pursued to a conclusion, the papers I have seen suggest that the approach adopted by GSOC was ultimately broadly similar to that of An Garda Síochána”.

He outlined his frustration at how, despite repeated requests, GSOC failed to provide the documentation before the deadline for the submission of his report.

He said that, as far back as March 13, GSOC chairman Simon O’Brien wrote to him “to indicate that the process of marshalling the relevant material was underway as a priority”.

On March 26, Mr Guerin wrote a reminder to the Commission. He received a letter less than a week later in which “the tight timescale was acknowledged” and in which he was told the relevant material had been identified and, subject to approval by GSOC, would be forwarded in due course.

Mr Guerin sent another reminder letter on April 10 reiterating that there was, at that stage, a very limited time left for him to review any documentation they sent.

Just before 5pm on April 23, the day before his report was due, he received a letter from a solicitor’s firm on behalf of GSOC, saying its client had “voluminous” relevant documents but the letter raised “various preliminary legal and practical issues” which, he said, should have been raised an earlier stage.

“I regret that the eagerness to co-operate that was communicated on behalf of GSOC by its solicitors did not find practical expression in an ability to make relevant documents available for examination in good time,” he noted.

“That has, unfortunately, been an obstacle to any assessment as part of this review of the adequacy of the investigations conducted by GSOC. It did not, however, interfere with the other work of the review.”

GSOC released a statement last night in a bid to explain its actions. It said while it knew Mr Guerin had eight weeks to complete his report it did not know he had a fixed deadline.

It said it had gathered a lot of material together but before it handed it over it had sought certain safeguards.

Under the terms of reference furnished to Mr Guerin, he was requested to conclude his review within eight weeks “or as soon as possible thereafter”. Therefore, while we were aware of the tight timescale, we were not aware of an exact fixed deadline date,” it said.

And it said while it was criticised for failing to heed the warnings of Sgt McCabe, it was hamstrung by the legislation governing it.

“The report is critical of some agencies and says that the same appears to be true of GSOC. We would like to note in this regard that GSOC has met and corresponded with Sgt McCabe.

“However, these meetings and correspondence always took place in the context of the fact that GSOC is expressly prohibited by the Garda Síochána Act (2005) from receiving complaints from serving Garda members,” it said.