Cooke report and Garda accountability
Clare Daly sought a statutory commission of investigation into alleged surveillance of GSOC, arguing that the Cooke report left key questions about lawful surveillance, Garda involvement and GSOC’s handling unanswered. The Tánaiste defended the independent report as comprehensive and said it found no evidence that GSOC was bugged or that Gardaí were involved.
I am very interested in the Tánaiste's views on Garda accountability and what happens next in the context of the Cooke report. We have heard from acting Commissioner O'Sullivan that gardaí have been exonerated from any wrongdoing in her opinion. Her words were very similar to those of former Commissioner Callinan who told us before the inquiry that at no stage was any member of An Garda Síochána involved. The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Fitzgerald, has told us that the report does not support evidence of actual surveillance much less that it was carried out by gardaí. The former Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, issued a press statement telling everyone he did a great job and had dealt with these matters in a straightforward, truthful and comprehensive way. GSOC welcomed the fact that it was found to have acted in good faith. In other words, everyone was right and we are where we were.
However, there is a very large elephant in the room. The fact that everyone is calling that a kitten does not make it any less of an elephant. The elephant in the room is the huge divergence between the report itself and the way in which it is being spun. The reality is that the Cooke report did not find any truth and it did not find any answers because it was constructed in a manner that ensured it would not. The title of the report refers to an investigation into unlawful surveillance. There was no attempt to discover whether lawful surveillance had taken place. As the Tánaiste knows, there is a legislative provision which makes it lawful for senior gardaí to allow other senior gardaí to surveil somebody else. We are told there was no evidence of Garda involvement. I was going to ask how Mr. Justice Cooke knows, but he is a former Justice not a Justice now. How does Mr. Cooke know this when not a single Garda was interviewed? There was no examination of logbooks and Garda equipment. There was no stock check on IMSI catchers and all the rest of it. The biggest security threat identified by Verrimus was the ring back, the chances of which being benign were virtually zero according to professionals. That was no explanation.
What does the Tánaiste think of the report? It tells us that the photographers at the airport photographing Verrimus could have been members of the Garda security branch.
Comment on this
The person who leaked the story to GSOC could have tampered with the device inside GSOC. No explanation has been given of who tried to contact Verrimus in relation to its involvement in the inquiry and no explanation has been given of why the GSOC commissioner's phone's batteries were going down but now are not. Meanwhile, the report acknowledges that modern surveillance is not possible to detect.
What I am asking is quite simple. How can there be a new relationship when we still have not got the truth? The Tánaiste is the leader of the Labour Party and is supposed to have a history in justice and oversight.
Comment on this
Will the Tánaiste authorise a proper commission of investigation on a statutory basis so that people can get the truth they so badly need?
Comment on this
I have read the Cooke report, which is very comprehensive. It concludes that there was no evidence of surveillance of GSOC by anybody, not least the Garda Síochána. It goes through the different issues that were raised. The piece of equipment that was supposed to be for the conference facility was the focus of a great deal of the attention. It turns out that it did not have a microphone. There was an allegation that there was a second WiFi system, but the report concludes that there was not. The report makes it clear that the public interest investigation conducted by GSOC should have been reported to both the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Garda Commissioner, but it was not provided until after the article appeared in The Sunday Times. The report questions whether the public interest investigation should have been conducted at the time it was.
I understand the Whips have discussed arrangements to debate the Cooke report in the House next week. If there are issues Members have on the content of the report, that will be the opportunity to ventilate them. The Cooke report is comprehensive and conclusive. If there are issues arising, particularly in respect of the recommendations, which the Government accepts should be implemented, they can be debated next week in the House.
Comment on this
It is bizarre that the Tánaiste refers to the report as comprehensive when Mr. Cooke himself talks about it being a personal evaluation and that it must not be read as a definitive determination. In fact, he is a retired judge and it is a personal opinion. The Tánaiste might as well have had the opinion of a retired dentist or a retired docker for all the difference it makes.
Comment on this
There is not a single piece of new information in the report. If the Tánaiste did indeed read it, he would know that the five issues I just mentioned are still not answered. How could it be that comprehensive?
Comment on this
The Tánaiste has dodged the fact that the report does not deal with the issue of lawful surveillance. Why was that excluded? The Tánaiste talks about the public interest inquiry under section 102 which provides for GSOC to investigate wrongdoing by gardaí. If the surveillance was lawful, there would be no wrongdoing to investigate. The Tánaiste knows and Cooke reports that the backdrop to this was the Boylan affair and the strained relations between GSOC and An Garda Síochána. We do not know whether rogue or senior elements in the Garda authorised themselves to have lawful surveillance.
Comment on this
In making his last point on the public interest inquiry and GSOC's observations, the Tánaiste's has again undermined GSOC by incorrectly repeating that it had an obligation to bring it to the attention of the Garda and the Minister. Section 103 excludes GSOC from doing so in the public interest.
I suggest the Tánaiste read the report again as he missed a few things in his comprehensive analysis.
Comment on this
No, I did not. The Cooke report is very clear. It is an independent examination by Mr. Justice Cooke of the issues relating to the alleged bugging of the GSOC offices. This arose when there was a newspaper article which stated as a fact that GSOC offices had been bugged by Government or high level intelligence gatherers. It went through the type of surveillance it felt was taking place. The Cooke report has gone through that and found no evidence of surveillance having taken place and no evidence of gardaí being involved. It goes through each of the different issues. It is fair and comprehensive and conclusive.
If there are issues people wish to discuss arising from the report, we will have a debate and a discussion next week. That will be the place to raise them. I am sure the Minister for Justice and Equality will be happy to respond to any questions which arise. Mr. Justice Cooke did a very good job. It is not fair to cast aspersions on his work or his integrity in the way in which he did it.