Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 20 Jun 2024

As the Deputy is aware, the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission is an independent statutory body established in 2007 under the Garda Síochána Act 2005. Its primary role is to provide independent investigation of complaints against members of An Garda Síochána, as required, and to undertake other investigations relating to the conduct of Garda members. This is vitally important work to uphold public confidence in An Garda Síochána and, rightly, GSOC is completely independent in the exercise of its functions. The Oireachtas legislated to ensure this independence, and to protect the organisation from any political interference in the investigations it must conduct without fear or favour but, of course, the ombudsman must always operate in accordance with the law. That independence is further strengthened in the new structures under the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act, which will establish Fiosrú when it is commenced in the autumn. As Minister, I have no role in GSOC investigations, nor can I direct how GSOC officers exercise their functions in which they are, as I mentioned, subject to the law at all times.

I am aware of the media report that I assume the Deputy referred to in the question. Any person who feels that they have a case in law could have recourse to the courts; I want to be careful there. However, no individual has conveyed any information to me, and nothing that has been brought directly to my attention, which would form the basis for the establishment of an inquiry. If the Deputy or any individuals who made this matter public have any specific information that would support any allegations of wrongdoing on the part of GSOC, I would be very grateful to receive that information.

I assure the Deputy that GSOC, like other bodies permitted to access telecommunications data in very limited certain circumstances, is required to exercise its powers in accordance with the law. GSOC, which is chaired by a former judge of the High Court, has advised me and has stated very publicly that it operates at all times in accordance with the law in all of its operations.

I was referring to the newspaper article written by John Mooney in The Sunday Times last weekend. There have been follow-up articles as well. It came about as a consequence of journalists receiving information they requested from GSOC about themselves. There appears to be solid evidence that the accessing of certain phone records is happening. Does the Minister accept that this is unlawful? Has she not been contacted by GSOC? Has she not contacted GSOC following this? GSOC is accountable to the Minister. Her Department is where its Vote comes through. I accept that when there is an investigation, GSOC has independence. I do not dispute that. However, I want to know how long this has been happening, whether it is lawful, on what legal basis it is happening, how often it occurred, and how many journalists were involved in this case. I understand that there is a basis in very limited circumstances to do this, but this is not what appears to be happening. I am very surprised that the Minister has not received a briefing from GSOC about this. The Minister should not rely on a Deputy to give her information. That is not my function. It is her function, given that GSOC is accountable to her, to satisfy herself that what it is doing is lawful.

There is nothing to suggest that this is widespread or current. In fact, the information I have seen very clearly indicates this relates to a particular case in 2016 and prior to that. In 2016, when this issue was raised, and my understanding is that this is potentially the same issue and the same case, a review was instigated. Mr. Justice Murray undertook to review the overall process that GSOC undertakes in relation to this matter. The recommendations from that suggested that there should be some changes related to the need for judicial discretion. Very soon after that, there was the Graham Dwyer case, which went to Europe. Once there was a ruling at a European level, the legislation under which GSOC operated ceased to be the legislation it worked by. Any time there was a request for phone records, it had to go through judicial operation, relying on other legislation. Since then, I brought in subsequent legislation in 2022 that has been enacted, which sets out very clearly the route requiring judicial discretion that GSOC must take. It must apply the rules that if this action is taken, it must be fair, balanced and in the public interest.

I am not aware of any number of incidents other than the one in 2016.

The review has already taken place and the law has already been changed. I have engaged with GSOC and it has assured me that it acts and has always acted in absolute accordance with the law. If somebody has different information, I would ask them to come forward but I do not have any such information. Nothing in the public domain has made it clear to me that there is anything else.

Has the Minister been in contact with GSOC since that article was written at the weekend? Has she satisfied herself that this is, as she has put on the record of this House, very limited? Is she absolutely satisfied that is the case? If so, on what basis is she satisfied it is the case? Is she aware that a legal case is likely to flow from this? It was reported in one of the newspapers yesterday that this is likely to happen. The NUJ has come out on this as well. I am very surprised. Has the Minister been in contact with GSOC this week following publication of that article? If so, what was the result of that dialogue?

GSOC has assured me in the last week that it is acting in accordance with the law. There is nothing to suggest there are any other cases of this type. I will be very cautious in speaking about the case the Deputy has referenced because it has been suggested that a legal case may be taken but that case refers to something that happened back in 2016. Subsequently, there was a review undertaken by Mr. Justice Murray, recommendations were implemented, laws were changed at a European level because of the Graham Dwyer case and I have changed the law. There is nothing in the public commentary to suggest that anything happened post 2016. GSOC has assured me that it acts in accordance with the law and I expect that to be the case. If somebody knows something to the contrary, I would ask him or her to come forward. The Deputy is asking me to conduct an inquiry when absolutely no evidence has been presented to me that anything happened here subsequent to 2016. If that is not the case, I ask that evidence be provided. However, I do not have such evidence and have to go by the information I have. As I have said, the landscape and legislative background have changed since 2016, concluding with the 2022 legislation that I enacted.

Does the Minister for Justice have any plans to reform the Garda vetting system and will she make a statement in that regard? We know the importance of the Garda vetting system. I have heard from many organisations about inconveniences relating to the system. Does the Minister have any plans to reform or change it?

The primary purpose of vetting carried out by the Garda National Vetting Bureau is to ensure the safety of children and vulnerable adults. The Deputy will appreciate the importance of this task and the need for it to be carried out thoroughly. I believe the many organisations centred around the safety, enjoyment and comfort of children and vulnerable people understand that they must take all reasonable steps to ensure that only suitable people are recruited and employed. We all take this responsibility very seriously. This requires a robust Garda vetting process that reassures the public, and parents in particular, that appropriate checks are conducted on people taking on positions of trust.

I am advised by Garda management that, while more complex cases can take some time, there is currently no delay or backlog in the standard vetting process. The turnaround time for the vast majority of applications is between five and six days. The target timeline is between five and ten working days.

I established the Garda vetting review group because, like Deputy Daly, colleagues have come to me with cases of people who have had to be vetted multiple times and I have seen it myself. Some people are working with multiple organisations, including sporting groups in their own communities. Is there a way to speed this up or could we have a different system that makes it easier for clubs to take people on or for people to work in schools and other environments while not diluting the process or the importance of the vetting system in any way? The membership of the group includes members of An Garda Síochána and officials from my Department, Tusla and other relevant stakeholders. I assure the Deputy that the group’s primary focus has been to examine the means of strengthening the vetting legislation in a workable and effective manner. I am informed that the group’s report on arrangements for Garda vetting will be finalised in the coming weeks. I have asked for it to be completed before the summer recess, that is, in the next three weeks. The group has been working on the report for some time and, once I receive it, I expect to respond to any recommendations immediately.

I thank the Minister for the reply. I spoke to a person last year who told me she had to be Garda vetted five times, not only because of her involvement with sporting organisations but also as she moved job within the same organisation. She still had to be Garda vetted because she was moving to a different department. While we have to strike a balance in protecting vulnerable people and children, there is also an obligation to make the process as unbureaucratic and unburdensome as possible so that volunteers are not turned away. Sinn Féin moved a Bill last year that is to go to Second Stage in two weeks' time. It sets out to provide a register of general consents. Under this Bill, people opening themselves up to Garda vetting could give a generalised consent allowing any organisation that requires Garda vetting to access that system, meaning the people in question would not have to complete the forms again. Is the Minister's review group giving that consideration?

I appreciate the challenges that people are facing. One of the issues that has been flagged with me as the work of the review group has been under way is that each individual group wants to be certain that the system is robust and that the people it is hiring or taking on and who may be engaging with young children or vulnerable people in their care have that certificate. At the same time, people are undertaking different processes, in some instances essentially at the same time, and we should have a better and more efficient way to deal with that.

The review is focused on two main areas. The first is the introduction of a system for revetting. This will require primary legislation and consideration of all of those elements and how we can revet a person in a reduced timeframe and a less cumbersome manner. The second is a review of the approach to vetting for specific employments with a view to linking vetting to the specific work of the employer or the work the employer is likely to give to the employee. That would move with the employee as opposed to remaining with the employer.

As I have said, the membership of the group comprises my own Department, the Garda National Vetting Bureau, Tusla, the Public Appointments Service, the Department of Education, the HSE, the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth and others. We will have the report before the end of the summer recess and I intend to move on the recommendations.

What restorative justice initiatives is the Minister's Department currently undertaking? Will she make a statement on the matter? From my time in the courts, I remember a case in which the person I was representing had been involved in a burglary in a certain part of Dublin. Communication with the victim of the crime was opened up at the door of the court, which alleviated the fear of the unknown in that the perpetrator and victim were able to talk to each other. Is the Minister considering putting any restorative system in place?

I thank the Deputy for raising the important issue of restorative justice initiatives. As he will be aware, restorative justice is a process that evidence shows can support victims to recover from the impact of crime as well as serving to reduce reoffending. It is an integral part of the work of the Probation Service, which established a restorative justice and victim services unit in 2018. The process helps to identify and repair some of the harm caused by offending. Its value was recognised in the 2020 programme for Government, in which we committed to working with all criminal justice agencies to build capacity to deliver restorative justice safely and effectively. This commitment was carried forward in my Department’s review of policy options for prison and penal reform. This was published two years ago and contained a number of actions to strengthen and support the delivery of restorative justice.

This work resulted in my Department’s policy paper "Promoting and supporting the provision of Restorative Justice at all stages of the criminal justice system". The paper brought together all the work carried out since 2020 and identifies the steps needed to strengthen and expand our capability to mainstream restorative justice across all services.

While the Probation Service continues to lead on the roll-out of restorative justice nationwide, referrals can also be made by the courts, An Garda Síochána or as part of ongoing court-ordered supervision, or indeed with people already serving a custodial sentence. It can also be initiated by a victim, if requested and assessed as appropriate. Restorative justice is currently available at several different stages of the criminal justice process and in relation to various types of offence. This includes lower tariff offences as part of diversion as well as post sentence to help meet the needs of people impacted by some of the most serious offences.

My Department has undertaken a lot of work in recent years to ensure the infrastructure to support increased referrals is in place and while I recognise referrals are down on pre-pandemic levels, they are again on the increase, which is welcome.

I thank the Minister of State for the reply. The mission statement of An Garda Síochána is to reduce crime, the causes of crime and also the fear of crime. Restorative justice can tick all those boxes but a recent study demonstrated referral statistics for restorative justice remain at pre-pandemic levels, excluding restorative cautions which have been delivered by An Garda Síochána. This study was carried out by Dr. Ian Marder of Maynooth University's school of law and criminology, whom we worked with. Restorative justice was used at a low level in 2019, accounting for only 1% of the criminal justice caseload, but this decreased during the pandemic from an already low level and referrals have not increased since then. Last year we brought the Criminal Justice (Promotion of Restorative Justice) (Amendment) Bill with help from Dr. Marder. It would help promote the use of restorative justice with a clear legislative framework for it. Does the Minister of State accept there is need for a better framework to complement the other projects given there will be more judges, more court sittings and inevitably more prisoners going into an overcrowded system, which is a burden this Bill might alleviate?

The Probation Service will soon publish a three-year restorative justice action plan aimed at promoting greater awareness and supporting increased use right across the system. This plan will detail how the Probation Service will further drive the integration of restorative justice into all its services. Restorative justice is really important. We did some very good work back in the 1990s in this area, but it probably has not been expanded in the way we would have hoped since then. That is one of the reasons the Minister and I got the Department to prepare and publish the policy paper I mentioned. There is huge capacity for restorative justice, building on an awful lot of the good work that has been done in other areas of the country in restorative justice. An example is the Cornmarket Project in my county of Wexford, but there are also the restorative justice services in Dublin, Meath, Wicklow and Kildare. There is Restorative Justice in the Community in Tipperary, Laois, Offaly and Westmeath, Le Chéile in Limerick, Cork and Clare and Tuam Community Training Centre covering Galway, Mayo and Roscommon. As I said, many of these were set up in the 1990s and there is a lot of good practice in them. We want to start taking some of those best practices and seeing them expanded.

Studies around the Commonwealth system in particular show restorative justice, where properly implemented, has a satisfaction rating for both sides of up to 90%. We all know in District Courts around the country there is an almost ad hoc system where solicitors get together with representatives of the other side and do it on a casual basis. If there was a formalised system in place to deal with cases before charge, during charge and before sentence, it would be a much better way to alleviate the pressure coming on the courts. The alleged offenders can address and repair any harm that is done in a much more expeditious and meaningful way without having to go through the whole court system.

I agree with the Deputy that restorative justice has huge potential. There are three elements needed, namely, the community, the victim and the offender. For the victim it can have quite a cathartic effect when it is handled right. The Deputy understands restorative justice needs to be handled very carefully. The offender has to be willing and understand and face up to their offence. The victim needs to be willing to participate. Then there is the community aspect to it. We need to have those three points for it to be effective and for the offender to understand the damage they have caused. When we have that situation where the community, victim and offender are brought together it can have a really positive effect on all three aspects of that and reduce reoffending.

As I said, we have published our policy paper and are rolling it out. We want to see a consistent approach to restorative justice in our courts system. I agree, as someone who has practised in law, that it has been done on a bit of an ad hoc basis, but as I said there are really excellent examples across the country. We want to take those examples and ensure restorative justice is available countrywide.