Daniel McConnell: Denham report far from a ringing endorsement of Woulfe's judgement
Ms Justice Susan Denham has found that the resignation of Supreme Court judge Seamus Woulfe would be disproportionate, following his attendance at the infamous Golfgate dinner. Picture: RollingNews.ie
The findings of the ex-Chief Justice Susan Denham report into Supreme Court judge Seamus Woulfe’s presence at the Oireachtas golf event in Clifden on August 19 have drawn a decidedly mixed reaction within legal and political circles.
From the moment the broke the story at lunchtime on Thursday that Ms Justice Denham had concluded that his removal from the court would be “unjust and disproportionate,” the Law Library and Leinster House were abuzz with equal expressions of criticism and support for Mr Justice Woulfe.
A controversial appointment to the Supreme Court, given his lack of any judicial experience, Mr Justice Woulfe was viewed as having been a “very political” Attorney General up to July of this year.
His presence at the golf event certainly raised eyebrows in legal and political circles, but in terms of the issue of sanction, there has been little consensus.
Ms Justice Denham is unambiguous in her view that he should not have attended the dinner.
“The Reviewer is of the opinion that Mr Justice Woulfe did not consider separately the propriety, or if there would be an appearance of impropriety, for a judge of the Supreme Court to attend a celebratory dinner in a public place while there is a pandemic in the State. He should have considered whether the community may regard the judge’s participation as an impropriety,” she concluded.
Based on the evidence and submissions received, Ms Justice Denham concluded that the 58-year-old did nothing involving impropriety such as would justify calls for his resignation from office.
Ahead of the event, Mr Justice Woulfe stated that, having obtained reassurances at the Ballyconneely Clubhouse, when he queried the event, that he need not have any concerns regarding the Covid-19 regulations and the dinner.
Mr Justice Woulfe explained that when he contacted the Chief Justice his concern was about judges going to an Oireachtas event, what was referred to as a separation of powers issue; it was explained the Covid-19 issue did not come into it.
Mr Justice Woulfe stated that Senator Paul Coghlan assured him strongly that ex-TD Donie Cassidy and the organising committee had consulted extensively with the authorities and had ensured that everything would be in compliance with the rules and the public health guidelines.
While some will feel he got off lightly, given the price paid by Dara Calleary and Phil Hogan, Mr Justice Woulfe's version of events is certainly not accepted wholesale by Ms Justice Denham and by extension his Supreme Court colleagues, who backed the report in its entirety.
For example, Mr Justice Woulfe sought no reassurances from the Chief Justice, or anyone as to whether attendance at a celebratory dinner, in a hotel, during a pandemic, was appropriate. From the transcripts, Mr Justice Woulfe told Ms Justice Denham that it would have been “ridiculous” to do so, but Ms Justice Denham disagrees with that to say the least.
“In the opinion of the Reviewer there is a great difference between four people sitting down together after a game of golf to have a bite to eat, and a larger formal celebratory dinner in a hotel, with speeches and a prize-giving, during a pandemic,” Ms Justice Denham said.
In his evidence, Mr Justice Woulfe stated that he was absolutely dumbfounded to hear that Mr Calleary had resigned on account of attending the dinner. He stated that he had not been aware of any breaches of the regulations or guidelines at that stage. He stated that he could not recollect any breach of the rules. However, he decided to make an apology for any unintentional breach of any guidelines on his part.
Some politicians are aghast with his defence that even though the Government rules changed on August 18, the day before the event, that they may not have kicked in straight away.
“It appeared there had been a Government announcement on Tuesday 18th August, when the public heard of the proposed new restrictive rules, including a rule about six persons, but Mr Justice Woulfe stated that he knew that there had to be a process to bring in a Statutory Instrument, to bring about a legal change that there should only be six persons at an event instead of 50. He stated that he knew that such a change could not happen automatically," the report states.
Some have reacted with disbelief to his explanation that at no time was he aware that there was a second group of diners from the Oireachtas Golf Society in an adjoining room behind a wall behind him.
“Justice Woulfe had his back to the partition wall. Before and during the dinner the partition wall remained closed. There was a gap at the end of the retractable wall for hotel staff to go to and from the kitchen. Justice Woulfe stated that he did not know that there was a second function room behind the partition wall,” the report states.
"It appears that late in the evening a gap was opened by the hotel staff in the retractable wall behind Judge Woulfe… Judge Woulfe stated that he did not know a gap had been opened, at the end of the dinner for the speeches and prize-giving," the report states.
“Judge Woulfe stated that he was not on his guard when in the Omey Suite, he did not count the number of people in the room, but he understands now that there were 45 people in the room, which he considered was consistent with his memory of the room,” the report adds.
By any standard, this is a less than auspicious start to his judicial career for Mr Justice Woulfe and while Ms Justice Denham stops short of calling for his head, the report is far from a ringing endorsement of his judgment either.
With Judge Woulfe’s position intact, many people will look on in dismay and see the elite circling the wagons and avoiding accountability.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
