Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
IT’S EXPECTED THE Sunday Times will publish further details tomorrow on the security sweep carried out last year at the Garda Ombudsman Commission’s Dublin offices. GSOC Chairman Simon O’Brien said as much himself on Wednesday, telling an Oireachtas committee he was expected another “early Sunday morning”.
The issue of what happened at the garda watchdog body’s offices, and the political handling of the emerging controversy made the headlines every day this week. Given the potential for more revelations tomorrow, and the fact that Justice Minister Alan Shatter’s due to appear before the same Oireachtas panel next week — it looks unlikely that the story will go away anytime soon.
If you haven’t been keeping up to date — here’s a quick run down of the main developments since last Sunday morning, with a particular focus on the disagreement that developed in the latter half of the week between Shatter and O’Brien.
[Photocall Ireland]
John Mooney of The Sunday Times broke the story, writing that a “sophisticated surveillance operation” was used to hack into emails, wi-fi and phone systems at GSOC’s Abbey Street building.
The Times reported:
The espionage was uncovered last year after GSOC hired a British security consultancy to investigate whether its headquarters in Abbey Street, Dublin, and its internal communications system were bugged.
There were immediate calls for Justice Minister Alan Shatter to clarify what had gone on, and to declare whether he had previously been aware of the UK firm’s security sweep.
Fianna Fáil’s justice spokesman Niall Collins said:
“The minister needs to come forward and explain whether he has spoken to the Ombudsman and whether he was aware of this surveillance.“If he was, he needs to explain why on Earth this was going on. If he wasn’t — we need to get answers very quickly on who is responsible.”
Justice Minister Alan Shatter called GSOC Chairman Simon O’Brien in for a meeting at the Department, and was given a written and oral briefing on the security sweep.
Various Cabinet members commented at press events throughout the day that what was being reported appeared “sinister”.
Simon O’Brien [Niall Carson/PA Wire]
In a statement that night , GSOC said that its database had not been compromised but that “three technical and electronic anomalies” were found that could not be “conclusively explained” when a security sweep of communications systems was carried out last year.
The statement also said there had been “no evidence of Garda misconduct”.
Later, Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan released a statement of his own — taking issue with that line:
“It is a cause of grave concern that the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission’s statement contains a clear indication that An Garda Síochána was in some way suspected of complicity in this matter despite GSOC’s overall finding that the existence of technical and electronic anomalies could not be conclusively explained.”
Alan Shatter told the Dáil that An Garda Síochána had been subject to “baseless innuendo” over the previous 48 hours, and said a narrative had emerged suggesting that the force had some involvement in surveillance at the GSOC offices.
The Minister said:
“It has not been established that the offices of the Ombudsman Commission were under surveillance.”
Later, Garda Ombudsman Commissioner Kieran Fitzgerald appeared on RTÉ’s Prime Time, and said that while there had been no “definitive evidence” of surveillance at the offices, he could not entirely rule it out either.
“It would be lovely to be able to say we could be certain one way or the other,” Fitzgerald said.
[Image: RTÉ Screengrab]
GSOC Chairman Simon O’Brien also held a meeting with Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan on Tueday to discuss developments to date, and to address Callinan’s issue with the previous night’s press statement.
GSOC Chairman Simon O’Brien appeared before the Oireachtas Public Oversight Committee.
He said that while there was no evidence of spying:
“I certainly suspect or potentially suspect that we may have been under some form of surveillance.”
Following the meeting, chairman of the committee (and Sinn Féin justice spokesman) Pádraig Mac Lochlainn TD said that the members had “grave concerns about some of the issues raised”.
The committee requested an unredacted copy of the report carried out by the UK security firm, and asked that the Justice Minister appear before the panel next week to give his take on the saga.
[Image: Oireachtas.ie]
Eamon Gilmore told the Dáil he was satisfied that no arm of the State had put the Garda Siochána Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) under surveillance.
The Tánaiste also described the surveillance claims as “serious” and said that the intention of the committee to speak to Shatter about the issue was “the right course of action”.
In a Prime Time interview that night, Shatter took issue with O’Brien’s comments before the oversight committee, and said the GSOC chairman’s public testimony had diverged from what he had been told in the pair’s meeting on Monday.
Shatter said that the information he gave to the Dáil had been “based entirely” on the oral and written briefing he’d received from O’Brien and on GSOC’s press release.
[Image: RTÉ Screengrab]
And when asked about the apparent differences between the two interpretations of what had happened, Shatter said:
“I’m very conscious that Mr O’Brien and the other members of GSOC were at a committee meeting for up to four hours and a series of questions were put to them.“During the course of that event there were different answers given with regard to particular issues.
“Indeed, some of what was said during the course of that seemed to me to be a little confused or contradictory.”
Shatter stressed that there had been nothing in the oral or written briefing or in the press statement that indicated O’Brien or other GSOC members believed they had been spied upon.
He also said he had written to the Commission, asking it to clarify if it believed it was under surveillance.
Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan made his first public comment since the bugging reports first emerged. In an appearance alongside Shatter at a garda event in Templemore, the force commander said he was satisfied no member of the gardaí had ever spied on GSOC:
“I want to unequivocally state that at no stage was any member of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission or any of its members under surveillance by An Garda Síochána.”
[Image: Garda Info]
At the same event, Shatter was asked by reporters to specifically state that he had full confidence in Simon O’Brien as GSOC chairman, after he had declined to do so on RTÉ the previous night.
The Minister replied:
“I have confidence in GSOC, I have confidence in the GSOC Commission. I’m not going to differentiate between individual members because it’s the commission and they make decisions collectively.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
This document was drawn up by Hasss, a right wing American, a member of Bushs admin, and still it’s not good enough for unionism? That speaks volumes about them, they don’t want a shared future, they never have… The supremacist mask is slipping yet again! The orange order are a massive obstacle to agreement.
They made one of the Orange Order’s top men one of their negotiators.
Unionism has to really ask itself if it wants a shared future.
They have fought and lost every battle from one man, one vote. Penal Laws, the vote for women, every democratic form in the last 200 years.
All lost and still the fight on.
We simply need to contain unionism, it will die a death as time moves on. Managing unionism into the inevitable is the real job. Unionists need to feel cherished, as The 1916 Proclamation stated. Lose the hatred, keep the history is my message to unionists.
Compromise seems to be a dirty word for unionists. They seem to equate it with surrender. There is absolutely nothing in the Haass Proposals that wouldn’t have improved life for everyone in the north. But then we know its the Orange Order calling the shots here. Putting up barriers to progress. Shared future? They don’t want to share anything with Nationalists because they despise them.
Nothing wrong with compromise
Well said. Unionism is dying of its own accord, let them die on their own swords!
Well done Martin McG. Blame and ‘failure’ talk isn’t going to help… keep trying for agreement .. it’s the only viable option
What do people expect when they vote in hardliners from both sides and leave the likes of Seamus Mallon etc. on the side line. While the orange order are living in a time warp and have nothing to offer if I was from that side of the community I would not trust Sinn Fein. It’s the power hungry big mouths from both sides that have always brought the North down these troubled roads, while the reasonable voices like John Hume etc are left looking on. Then you have to listen to Ian & Gerry rewrite history, sickening.
Im not surprised a unionist like you want want Seamus and John Tom both retired many years ago Mallon was a careerist Patsy John hume did eventually move beyond those nationalist parties like fine gael who were anti good friday agreement so fair play there but even the latest govt papers show sdlp were out of touch in 1973 and if you look at the recent bbc politics shows nothing has changed
Tom you do know SDLP were involved in these negotiations as well? They and Sinn Fein both accepted the document.. Sinn Fein or the SDLP are clearly not the problem here.
Actually Eamonn in my younger years before my brain fully developed I actually helped the local shinner at election time with posters etc, long before it was popular. So you’re well wide of the mark calling me a unionist, but a typical shinner, shout down others and twist the truth. Thankfully I’ve matured enough over the years to realise you can’t justify everything just because it suits your point of view. Now trot along, good lad
Wee Lebowski I do realise that and I apologise for getting up on the soap box
Pardon me It was you who said you were from that side of the community read above perhaps the development of your argument is like that of your politics old and wasted
Take of the dark glasses, You might be able to read then, I never said any such thing, I said IF. You just read/saw what suited you………………..nothing new there
iF ok me bad you need to check your glasses too as I didn’t write being part of any party anywhere
True you didn’t, but I took a peak at your FB page :p
My political views are Phoblacht na hÉireann that and that only Tom im a member of no party fact
Fair enough Eamonn, the simple point I was trying to make is that it is a pity that it is the hardliners that dictate the direction the north goes. Which is a pity.
No if we had hardliners in the twenty six who stood up to the British threat of violence we wouldn’t of had partition and violence this past 100 years that’s the pity, the peace process is just that a process for uionists and some nationalists on both sides of the artificial border to begin the development of a unified Ireland even the utv news channel are moving away from the union
So in your imagination if there was a united Ireland there’d be peace???????????? Your not living in reality. Did you happen to watch the spotlight programme last year on support for a united Ireland amongst nationalists in the north, if you did then you’d realise it won’t be happening any day soon. The Good Friday Agreement should be the only show in town regardless what you think.
Your thinking is definitely skewed if you think
“the peace process is just that a process for uionists and some nationalists on both sides of the artificial border to begin the development of a unified Ireland”
Here Eamonn read this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-21345997
I suppose that it’s the Brits telling lies
In fairness the SDLP wouldn’t get out of their own way. The SDLP were ending for the dust bin of history no matter what the circumstances.
First of all Seamus Mallon is dead! The SDLP did nothing for peace in the north, could not even vote for Nelson Mandela’s freedom the City of Derry! Useless fools and now they are comely obsolete!
You missed the whole point Tom! Sinn Fein were crucial to the compromises not SDLP!
And what party do you tow your allegiance to! Sounds like Blueshirtism to me!
Very true, because they could not make up their minds what aide they were on! They called themselves Nationalists but acted more like Unionista!
At least they renounced violence, the same cannot be said for Sinn Fein.
on the contrary, Sin Fein have indeed renounced violence, as you would see if you were not so blind! The problem with the SDLP was they believed in everything and nothing. They denounced violence but lacked the courage to take on the State violence in any meaningful way.
So attending commemorations ceremonies for dead bombers is renouncing violence?
Yes, Sinn Fein have renounced violence as indicated by McGuinnesses words and actions. However honoring fallen volunteers, men and women who gave their lives is perfectly legitimate as long as the past is the past. There is no organized Republican paramilitary organizations today and when so called dissidents carry out acts of violence they are condemned by Sinn Fein. So yes they have renounced violence. Do you believe that there is any other organization or party who could have achieved the decommissioning which Sinn Fein did? Face facts there would be no GFA without the courage of Sinn Fein!
McGuinness cannot be the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister at the same time. He might like to be but I think that others might also be involved.
Pedant Pat. Seemed a reasonable summation of the the situation as it stands from Mr McGuinness.
He can.
It’s explained here:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Minister_and_deputy_First_Minister
Thanks Paul. I did not realise that both shared equal power. I think the article refers to Mcguinness as being the First Minister. It is a bad day when you do not learn something new.
You were not entirely wrong Patrick.
The headline abbreviated his full title of Deputy First Minister.
Legally they both are the same jobs.
In another few years Sinn Féin will be the largest party and entitled to the first Minister post.
They have already said they will then change the title to joint first minister so that Unionists can say that an Irish taig does not have the job.
Even though it is still the same job.
The more they are accommodated the more they act up.
Indeed! The more they get the more they want!
have your say