TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 8 °C Wednesday 22 May, 2013

Shatter admits frustration, but says Anglo probe can’t be rushed

The minister for justice responds to criticism from Pat Rabbitte in today’s Sunday Independent, saying full investigations need time.

Image: Julien Behal/PA Archive

THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE has this morning said the process of bringing prosecutions against figures from within Anglo Irish Bank cannot be rushed – in what appears to be a rebuke to a cabinet colleague.

In a statement this morning, responding to newspaper reports this morning criticising the length of time required by the Anglo investigation, Shatter said delays to the investigation were “a source of frustration – to myself, my colleagues in government, and people generally”.

The minister said he had been given assurances from the Garda Commissioner, Martin Callinan, that the investigations into Anglo’s affairs were receiving “absolute priority”.

“It is, of course, a matter for the Director of Public Prosecutions to make decisions on the cases submitted to her,” the minister said.

“In those circumstances, clearly it is not possible to go into precise details of these investigations so as to avoid the danger of prejudicing the possibility of proceedings against persons.”

Shatter’s comments came after one of his cabinet colleagues, Labour communications minister Pat Rabbitte, gave a wide-ranging interview to the Sunday Independent in which he described the “interminable delay” in bringing charges against the main players as “unconscionable”.

“I find it very difficult [to understand] why no file has yet been stamped for the prosecution authorities to do their business,” Rabbitte said in an interview with Willie Kealy.

Shatter also appealed for patience while Gardaí and prosecutors decided whether to bring any charges as a result of the outcomes of the Mahon and Moriarty Tribunals.

“It will be appreciated that both of these Tribunals sat for many years, partly reflecting the complexity of the issues involved… [but] I am confident that An Garda Síochána, where they have reason to believe that offences have been committed,  will deal with these matters without fear or favour,” he said.

“Under our criminal justice system individuals are presumed innocent until proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

“It is clearly important that public comment is not made which could prejudice criminal proceedings and damage the prospects of such proceedings being successfully taken where it is deemed appropriate to do so.”

In full: TheJournal.ie‘s full coverage of the Mahon Tribunal >

Read next:

Comments (69 Comments)

  • Truthfully – we are a shambles of a country which sent people to prison for not paying a TV license yet still protect and support criminals who brought this country to it’s knees.
    Nothing will ever happen, these criminals will sail into obscurity with massive pay offs and well insulated against the austerity their buddies in FF, FG and Labour has subjected the rest of us to.

    Reply
  • Can’t be rushed because there are too many bigwigs, developers, bank executives, politicians to be protected. Do people not realise how difficult it is to create a cover up of this scale.

    Reply
  • The Anglo Probe, eh?

    I could, but I won’t :-)

    Reply
  • Justice was pretty swift for Teresa Tracey. Remember Haughey. Sent him away alright, with a state funeral.

    Reply
    • @Don Booker

      That’s right! and all Teresa was trying to do was ask them not to cut her trees down! On HER land! Trees that give us oxigen to breath! Sad.

      Reply
    • yep…Teresa went to jail for protecting the trees on her own land!!!! The speed of retribution was eye-watering in her case..but a snail would move faster than the present investigations into corruption.Nothing, absolutely nothing happens to the culprits responsible for wrecking the country in perpetuity!!!!! There is absolutely no political will whatsoever to do anything about corruption…they like it the way it is…because it feeds into their hidden agendas….there is a total disconnect between reality on the ground for ordinary people and the life of privilege for the gilded few. The ‘sans coulettes’ are growing in numbers though…Joan Burton and Lucinda Creighton have their finger on the pulse…they know the people have had enough…and they know that soon something will snap. I admire their courage but they too run the risk of paying a heavy price…watch !!!!!

      Reply
    • @Christine Daly

      Hear, hear!

      Reply
  • Unlike running up penalty points for traffic offences, nonpayment if the household charge, not having a dog license, and a host of other really serious and significant crimes, the fact that an investigation into the bank that broke the taxpayer and destroyed the shareholdings of many retail punters nearly four years after nationalisation has not concluded is both sickening and incredible.

    Reply
  • needs time and a lot of money for lawyers

    Reply
  • They are all in one an others pockets so nothing will happen,

    Reply
    • so then why has Shatter attempted to break the legal services monopoly at the frustration to most of his former colleagues?

      And why did he run a special referendum just to cut judges pay?

      Reply
    • And this is only more LIP SERVICE where no action will be taken against these people who have bankrupt our Country and all of the Hard Working People of her disgrace on our Government to Insult us the way they are SHAME SHAME SHAME

      Reply
    • John 08/04/12 #

      Shatter would appear like he will stop at nothing to erode the separation of powers between the Executive and the Legislature…what does that say about his views/contempt for Democracy?

      Reply
    • Be as cynical as you want about this but I don’t see a single reason why this government doesn’t want very high profile and successful prosecutions out of the Anglo investigations. There’s huge political gain to be had to any government that oversees the jailing of anyone in relation to the banking crisis.

      Reply
    • @david…..because this government are Anglo!!!!!!!!!!!!
      Can’t see them jailing themselves!! Open your eyes, look, and listen, wake the hell up. They have a lot more to loose by holding anyone accountable! Watch this expire into the sunset like Mahon……nothing will be done!!!

      Reply
    • Ryan O Neill
      You hit the nail on the head .” This Government are Anglo .” Very true.
      They will not jail their pals.

      Reply
  • They will all be dead by the time anything comes around

    Reply
  • Fair play to Pat Rabbitte, I always used to admire him until he was effectively gagged in this government . Is this the rebellious side of him reemerging ? You could do worse Pat , give it a lash … It is ridiculous to think that this investigation is still ongoing , when every one knows the evil cruelty perpetrated by these evil men. Who else is being protected ?

    Reply
  • If these individuals are ever brought to court the first objection raised by their lawyers is they cannot expect a fair trail as the media has written extensively about the banking collapse and the key individuals.Look at Fingleton and anglo and the attempt to get a watch and €1million pension returned.They had to go to court to start a case as the 6 year statute of limitations to bring a case was almost up.We are seeing a deliberate attempt by the legal and politictical parties to run the statute of limitations down…..Shatter’s body language shows complete arrogance and contempt for the public and the need for accountability……

    Reply
  • He’s a poor waffler.

    Reply
  • As they have habitually used the emergency powers Offences Against the State Acts to interrogate, prosecute and jail Ordinary Decent Criminals (working class crims) for decades now, there should be no barrier to using them against the scumbags who brought down the entire country and stole billions.

    Stick them in the Curragh, anyone?

    Reply
  • I get so frustrated by some of the comments here. Of course we all want people to be prosecuted and convicted for the Anglo Irish collapse (and others) and yes it is frustrating that so much time has elapsed since this investigation started. But this is the price we pay for living in a state where in order to jail somebody you have to prove crimes conclusively and without doubt and be able to directly attribute that crime to an individual. Can you begin to even imagine the difficulty in doing that in such a complex case as Anglo?

    It’s all too easy for people to say “we all know they were corrupt” or “we know they were all in on it” but we don’t live in a society where we decide who goes to jail on what people think they know. Nor do we jail anybody because of public opinion. The debacle over the Kevin Reynolds affair should prove that to us. How many people condemned this man when the first Prime Time programme went out only for it to be proved that there were huge flaws and mistakes in the programme? Everybody is rushing to judge RTÉ on that one without possibly thinking about how they reacted to this programme in the first place.

    As for the government, I’d say if they could directly put people in jail for Anglo tomorrow they would jump at the chance because of the popular nature of such an act. It would give them a huge boost. Thankfully we don’t give them that power and never should. We can’t have it both ways.

    Reply
    • Well said, Jim. Justice may take time but it must be done.

      Reply
    • finally some sense. people go on about tv licences etc. the point being these people broke the law. it can be proved Black and white. the case with Anglo is not. we as a country cannot afford to rush the case and people get off (if guilty) as things were not done right. if they rushed it through and they got off the same ones giving out will say boys looking after each other again.

      Reply
    • There are lots of Really Pissed Off People here belching really hot furious air for random reasons.

      If these cases were rushed and subsequently failed in court because due process wasn’t followed, the Really Pissed Off People would be back here again belching even more really hot furious air.

      Because some people just like doing that. They belch away and they get loads of thumbs ups and they feel good getting loads of thumbs ups and that’s it.

      Reply
    • The investigators need considerable accounting/trust law skills for cases like this and where does this come from within a traditional police force. Forensic expertise in these areas has been a killer problem within the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in London which, in turn, has caused several white-collar, criminal cases to collapse or a failure to prosecute. In the long run, either of these scenario would be much worse than a short-term delay.

      Reply
    • @Eugene, I mentioned the TV license and the imprisonment of people who for their own reasons didn’t have one, yes it was breaking the law but the penalties far out weighed the crime.
      Their is certain laws relating to economics and banking which were broke systematically not just here but in other countries, other countries however have punished those who did break that law, what have we got here? – a few piecemeal arrests and soft interviews in Garda stations?…..a few soundbites from politicians yet no firm assertive action.
      The TV license was mentioned because it’s to our eternal shame that our system allowed for quick and severe punishment for what is essentially a very very minor crime yet 4 or 5 years on not one corrupt banker, politician or company who has crippled our country has been called to account.

      Reply
    • @ dermot I agree that jailing for not paying a tv licence is wrong but my point was it is easy to prove you committed the crime, the same way if you get caught speeding. there is issues around anglo and I hope things are sorted soon but I would prefer there was no cracks in the case so the extra time is needed. if it went to court now it may just look like a bank went to the wall which is not a crime and the decision to prop it up was the ff govt so the people involved walk free. that is not good enough for what has been done to the country and its people. other countries may have jailed bankers (i am not aware of any bankers in jail, maldof was not banking if refering to him) but they also may have more stringent laws which we do or did not have.

      Reply
    • I agree completely with your comments regarding rushing into things and running the risk of royally screwing up any potential court case but how long is needed?
      I will admit wanting my pound of flesh and i can safely assume I’m in the majority that want some semblance of justice been done but time is fading away and people, rightly or wrongly see the delay as just another example of “one law for them, one law for us”……
      If one thing this downfall has enlightened people to the real dealings between politics and banking, they look back……((hindsight) – and see how so many liars, thieves and corrupt people get away richly rewarded and scot free, now they want justice, they want change and this ongoing saga with no-one being held to account riles us more, we fear it’s a case of same old same old and it’s wrong to wave this concern away as-

      “belching really hot furious air for random reasons.”…….. ©Impartial Eclipse 2012.

      Reply
    • I’m also quite intoxicated celebrating Ulsters epic win today. :P
      Time for bed methinks. :P

      Reply
  • jrbmc 08/04/12 #

    Shut up you fool, nobody cares what you think!

    Reply
  • i bet in 2020 the country will still be on its knees and those behind it will still be unapprehended….
    surely anybody interfering with due process e.g. anglo irish employees not handing over encryption passwords etc. should be jailed immediately for obstruction and COSTLY processes sped up a little…..

    Reply
  • It is a pity people trust any politicians as they constantly abuse us. Grant Thornton have the job of winding up Anglo and apparently it will take 12 years – God help us as these guys are also hired as advisors to government to help make our country run more efficiently. 12 years – Shatter. Corrupt as most things associated with this lot. Who signed the order for this contract ? Knowing it would take 12 years is criminal. These guys will get paid handsomely for 12 years. Another tribunal is needed to determine who agreed to this.

    Reply
  • You don’t say Alan!

    Reply
  • The only politicians who go to jail here are scapegoats to protect the rest of the crooked ones.We had our best chance with lawlor,as he was going to bring down a few,but sadly he never got home.wonder why??????

    Reply
  • I think that the bankers of anglo will have to be brought to trial quickly and efficiently, too much bad has happened to warrant their arrest, and they have to be held to account. Too much pussyfooting has gone on between the politicians and delay too, and the people demand that they should be brought infront of them. You may have read that the anglo bankers want bodyguards to protect them against the public, well if they don’t come infront of us, they will have to answer to the man upstairs in the afterlife. This has gone on for too long, and they should be arrested and put into jail. Any ordinary man and woman gets jail for not paying the tv licence, so it should be for the elite. It is one law for the rich, and another for the poor. Ireland is an unequal society, through and through, rotten to the core, and we should all rise up to them and stand up for ourselves. The politicians should look at the video of Animal Farm, which I watching yesterday, and then maybe they would learn something from it.

    Reply
  • Alan

    Please refrain from being so cute, a la Colonel Oliver North. Please search in Google for ‘Windle stops swindle’ and do the right thing for the widows and orphans of Ireland.

    Cheers

    The Common Informer

    Reply
  • That Don is an excellent point Shatter can put a little old lady in prison for no crime but Anglo bosses oh no

    Reply
  • Tomohawk 09/04/12 #

    Unless I’m mistaken, moving billions off your balance sheet and then back again is already illegal. Also, arranging to prop up your share price by giving loans. Also, refusing to co-operate with Garda enquiries. Just jail the f*ckers, even if it’s only for a short stretch. While they’re sitting in their cold cells, the proper case can be researched and they can then be charged for the other offences they have committed. There is no need for the delay in putting these criminals away.
    T

    Reply
  • SHATTER YOU INCOMPETENT BAFOON

    Reply
  • shatter has the cheek to tell us to cop on and then wants it his way..YOU INCOMPETENT FOOL

    Reply
  • I presume that everyone here who is ranting at Alan Shatter voted yes in last year’s referendum on inquiries by the Oireachtas – the one that would have avoided in future these expensive tribunals and facilitate speedy investigations?

    I mean ye wouldn’t be the perennial toys out of the pram vote no to everything types. Oh no…

    Reply
    • John 08/04/12 #

      Impartial Eclipse,
      What on Earth are you talking about?…this man asked the people of this Country to vote yes to a Referendum on Oireachtas Powers which would have fundamentally undermined the existing Legal system and each Citizen’s right to legal representation if it saw fit. It’s astonishing that people with his views exist in a democratically elected Government and indicates a level of superiority and downright contempt for the Electorate that is quite bewildering.

      Reply
    • John,

      That is nonsense. What you’re suggesting would have been completely repugnant to the Constitution and wouldn’t have got past the AG. Shatter doesn’t act alone with complete powers to himself.

      Please don’t be so hysterical again when/if you reply. Thanks.

      Reply
    • John 08/04/12 #

      Impartial Eclipse, I’m not the hysterical type, apologies if any offence caused. follow the link below for an opinion on the Referendum in question, Lisa Chambers is a FF VP, but is also a trained Barrister at Law.

      http://lisachambers.ie/2011/10/24/oireachtas-committee-referendum-shattering-citizens-rights-to-a-good-name-and-reputation/

      Reply
    • John,

      What you said wasn’t offensive to me – it was just irritating. Alan Shatter comes in for an extraordinary amount of personalised and spiteful abuse on this site and I’m mystified as to why this is. I actually think he’s pretty competent in the two briefs he’s taken on. He could do with a course in media management and public relations but I’d rather a competent member of the cabinet who was clumsy when it came to PR than an incompetent one who could plámás all around him.

      In the article you posted, Ms. Chambers referred to what she implies was a conflict of interest in the drafting of the proposed amendment. Given the emormous sums of money handed over to barristers investigating matters that could have been done far more cheaply by an Oireachtas committee, it’s hardly surprising that she, a barrister, would take a dim view of the removal of such a lucrative cash cow. She didn’t mention that conflict of interest.

      It’s not the job of the Supreme Court to identify “defects and flaws” in the constitution. In this instance, it would have been to determine whether a proposed law was repugnant to the constitution. If the law is repugnant, it’s thrown back to the lawmakers to either change the law or propose a constitutional amendment to the people.

      The amendment would allow a particular law or laws be passed that would have given certain powers to Oireachtas committees. Such laws would still have needed to be consistent with other parts of the constitution – in particular with Article 40 (dealing with fundamental rights) which wouldn’t have been changed.

      So I don’t accept yours or her arguments. At all.

      Reply
    • John 08/04/12 #

      Impartial Eclipse, The facts put forward in the Referendum must really irritate you in that case. Ms.Chambers didn’t need to refer explicitly to Barrister’s vested interests in this issue since as she stated the Oireachtas Committee already has power to carry out investigations. The following paragraph states part of what the Electorate were asked to vote for:
      “The Committee will also decide what rights are available to you. Whether you have the right to employ counsel to cross examine a witness (a right automatically available in court) is a decision for the Committee.”
      What kind of Democracy does this represent?

      Reply
    • John, nothing a committee could say or do would affect Article 40. If you have a problem with this argument (reiterated again below), let me know.

      “The amendment would allow a particular law or laws be passed that would have given certain powers to Oireachtas committees. Such laws would still have needed to be consistent with other parts of the constitution – in particular with Article 40 (dealing with fundamental rights) which wouldn’t have been changed.”

      Reply
    • John 08/04/12 #

      Impartial Eclipse, Article 40 of the Constitution is not at issue…it’s this particular Amendment to the Constitution that’s under scrutiny. The Government would have sought Legal Opinion from the AG regarding the wording of this Amendment to ensure it didn’t violate the Constitution, and the resultant Referendum wording would have reflected this opinion. How repugnant does the wording have to be before fundamental human rights are violated? Your line of argument may have some validity if the wording of the Amendment wasn’t so controversial. Shatter & Co tried to pull a fast one with this Amendment this time around.

      Reply
    • John,

      Article 40 is an issue – for YOU. It’s there in the constitution GUARANTEEING the rights you insist some future law could somehow have taken away. So you’re wrong.

      TBH, the wording of your latest post suggests you’re struggling a wee bit with the whole process of constitutional amendments.

      Reply
    • John 09/04/12 #

      Impartial Eclipse,

      If anyone has struggled with Constitutional Amendments, don’t look to far beyond Mr.Shatter…You & I will not agree on this matter. I have a fundamental issue with the wording of that proposed Amendment, your primary argument is the Constitiution should be used as a safety net of last resort…while the Constitution guarantees the rights of individuals, it should not be used as a last resort…Good law doesn’t violate the Constitution in the first instance. The proposed Amendment would have made very poor law and your argument all along is that Article 40 would protect the Citizen in any case…Rushed law is bad law. Goodnight Sir/Madam, I’m off to bed now!

      Reply
    • It was rejected for good reason.

      Reply

Add New Comment