Two investigations, two outcomes: what the gun parts case says about garda accountability
A senior garda working out of Garda HQ took possession of firearms from his local gun club and brought them in his vehicle to Garda HQ in the Phoenix Park. File picture: Laura Hutton/ RollingNews.ie
How can two reports on the same issue, regarding an extremely serious matter, arrive at completely different results?
That question requires answering in the case of the importation of gun parts, under the claim that they were required for An Garda Síochána, when in reality they went to a private gun club.
Last week, it emerged that the Garda ombudsman, Fiosrú, has sent a file to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to consider a criminal prosecution in this case.
The case was brought to Fiosrú’s attention through a protected disclosure.
Yet the same discloser — or whistleblower — presented the same evidence to An Garda Síochána, and an internal garda inquiry found that nobody has anything to answer for in the case.
No reason to refer to the DPP. No disciplinary matter arose. No more to see here, just move along.
The matter was not even referred by then Garda commissioner Drew Harris to the justice minister, which is a legal requirement if it is deemed in any way serious.
Under Section 36 of the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act, the garda commissioner is duty-bound to inform the minister and the secretary general of the Department of Justice of “matters relating to significant developments concerning”, among other things, “significant developments that might reasonably be expected to adversely affect public confidence in An Garda Síochána”.
The current justice minister Jim O’Callaghan confirmed in response to a parliamentary question from Labour TD Alan Kelly that his office had not received any such notification.
So it would appear that the general attitude to the investigation and what was uncovered was ‘nothing to see here, please move along’.
Yet now it emerges that Fiosrú’s investigation had a very different conclusion.
The issue arose in 2018 when a senior garda working out of Garda HQ in the Phoenix Park became aware that his local gun club in the east of the country was having difficulties.
Attempts to locate much-needed firearm parts were hitting a brick wall.
The club had gone to a firearms dealer, but he told them the parts they required were not available in the State.
The garda, who did not have an official role in the gun club, offered to help.
He took possession of the firearms and brought them in his vehicle to Garda HQ in the Phoenix Park.
Transporting weapons in this manner is potentially a criminal offence.
Importation of such parts is strictly controlled.
Usually, when a State body needs to access such parts, authorisation is required from the Department of Justice.
This is done on trust as the minister of the day, or his or her officials, would not be familiar with the details of firearms.
The garda prepared the paperwork and presented it to the Department of Justice in July 2018.
It was signed off on the basis that the parts were required by gardaí.
These actions are certainly open to the possibility that fraud was occurring, as the departmental officials and the justice minister of the day, Charlie Flanagan, were misled.
This was highly questionable also, as the parts were destined for a private entity.
The firearms were repaired and returned to the club, once more transported by the senior garda.
The following year, a garda in the armoury section of An Garda Síochána made a number of protected disclosures, all alleging various types of malpractice.
Later, due to what the discloser saw as foot-dragging by An Garda Síochána in investigating his disclosure, he also furnished the Garda ombudsman with a copy.
The internal Garda investigation was completed in late 2024, more than five years after it was submitted.
In the finished report, the senior garda at the centre of the case claims the parts were needed for guns to be used for training gardaí.
However, no gardaí use these types of weapons.
The investigation found that the guns made their way back to the gun club from Garda HQ.
It confirmed that the gardaí bore the cost of the whole operation.
Despite what occurred, no disciplinary action was recommended in the report.
Neither is there any recommendation that the matter should be investigated for any possible criminal offences.
The report also includes arresting details of partial mitigation.
For instance, it suggests that the senior garda who transported the weapons from the gun club to Garda HQ and back might have been doing so legally under a 1925 Act if his purpose was indeed to use these guns for training gardaí.
The report does not detail any instances of training, nor does it locate any officers who were trained with these weapons.
The report also notes that the evidence of two gardaí on one side is in conflict with that of a central figure in the gun club, along with a firearms dealer who was aware of the whole matter.
No finding is made on this conflict.
When this issue first came to light, Alan Kelly told the that he was astounded that the matter had not been fully investigated.
“How was this allowed to happen, and how has no one been held to account for potential criminal matters?” he said.
“This is an extremely serious matter that the current minister for justice needs to deal with immediately.”
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
