Limited report just deepens cynicism

The timing of the publication of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission report into the investigation of the West Cork murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier in 1996 must provoke deep cynicism.

It was released on the eve of a bank holiday weekend and after the Dáil had broken up for the summer. It was, to reuse the infamous phrase coined by Tony Blair’s communications manager Anji Hunter on 9/11, published on “a good day to bury bad news”.

That the report was almost six years in the preparation suggests there was no pressing deadline. It might have had more impact had it been published when it would have attracted forensic attention rather than a bank-holiday glance.

By the time the Dáil reconvenes, it will be just another half-forgotten footnote in a decades-long saga that, no matter which rumours you find convincing, stinks to high heaven. This unfortunate publication date does not inspire confidence or, more importantly, epitomise the kind of determination needed to resolve these deeply disturbing matters.

That the report is, through no fault of the GSOC, far from complete because the agency does not have the powers to compel witnesses to give evidence, must add to that deepening well of cynicism.

The GSOC reports that “a number of Garda members were less than co-operative and thus it was not possible for GSOC to fully establish some of the details”.

Some gardaí used the fact that that they had retired, unsurprising in a case stretching back 22 years, as an excuse not to co-operate. Others have died. Remember, the GSOC is an agency established with the full authority of our parliament so by refusing to co-operate with it, an individual is giving two fingers to our democracy. That charge stands even if the GSOC does not have the full suite of powers needed to complete a reliable investigation — one that might have consequences.

Ian Bailey’s solicitor, Frank Buttimer, was succinct: “The reality of the GSOC as an organisation is that it is powerless, in any meaningful way, to carry out any form of proper investigation into garda corruption.”

He is not the first to make that accusation — one that applies to all GSOC work, not just this case — and he will not be the last unless the Dáil entrusts the GSOC with the powers needed to do its job properly.

If it does not quickly do so, the GSOC, again through no fault of its own, will remain nothing more than a spancelled puffball promising accountability but being little more than a part player in official window-dressing.

The findings of the report are as disturbing as its limitations. In that grand old Irish tradition no-one is named or held responsible despite the GSOC’s conclusion that there was “a lack of administration and management of aspects of the investigation”. There is a well-defined command structure in the force so that silence cannot be regarded as anything other than an evasion by the authors.

The report also found that evidence went missing but was unable to explain how, incredibly, professional policemen might lose a blood-splattered gate. Neither was it able to explain, or more importantly hold anyone to account, for the fact that pages had been removed from notebooks central to the investigation. That it found no evidence of “high-level” — an important qualification possibly — garda corruption means that these events are just unfortunate happenstance.

Once again, it is hard to respond with anything other than dangerous and deepening cynicism.

The PSNI’s deputy chief constable, Drew Harris, takes up his position as the next Garda Commissioner next month and this report underlines again the huge scale of the cultural and professional challenge he faces. He cannot succeed alone.

This report confirms that unless the GSOC is given greater powers, he is probably beaten before he begins. None of us, especially the gardaí, can afford that.