Disclosures Tribunal garda seeks to halt disciplinary inquiry
Charleton findings ‘not legally binding’, court told
A GARDA who was criticised by the Disclosures Tribunal is seeking to halt a disciplinary investigation arising from its findings.
Last year Mr Justice Peter Charleton dismissed allegations made by Gda Keith Harrison and his partner Marisa Simms that gardaí had coerced her to make a false complaint against him, and directed Tusla to visit their family home.
The judge described some parts of their story as “nonsense” and exonerated gardaí and Tusla officials against whom allegations were made.
The High Court heard yesterday that the Co Donegal-based garda was notified in July that a superintendent had been appointed to examine four allegations of misconduct against him.
These arose from the tribunal’s findings and evidence heard during hearings.
They include allegations Gda Harrison was “malicious and vexatious” in making claims that had been found to be false and entirely without foundation.
The notice of investigation sent to Gda Harrison also included the allegation that adverse commentary about him by Mr Justice Charleton “would bring An Garda Síochána into disrepute” and that his conduct in a number of specific incidents was “unbecoming to a member” of the force.
Gda Harrison denies any misconduct and disagrees with the tribunal’s findings.
He has claimed he was the victim of a five-year intimidation campaign after arresting a fellow officer for drink driving in Athlone in 2009.
In an affidavit, Gda Harrison’s legal team said the opinions expressed by Mr Justice
Charleton were not legally binding and could not be determinative as to whether allegations made by the garda were true or false.
His counsel, Mark Harty SC, appearing with solicitor Trevor Collins, told the High Court that Gda Harrison was seeking orders quashing the appointment of the investigating officer and prohibiting the disciplinary investigation.
He said his client was seeking a declaration that the appointment of an investigating officer was unlawful and contrary to natural and constitutional justice.
In an ex-parte application, Mr Harty told the court that while tribunal findings can have an impact on someone’s reputation, they cannot have an impact on their legal rights.
He said the tribunal findings could not give rise to a disciplinary investigation.
Mr Harty argued that An Garda Síochána was seeking to discipline his client on the basis of matters contained in protected disclosures. This, he said, was in breach of the Protected Disclosures Act, under which someone making a such a disclosure cannot be penalised for doing so.
The barrister also said An Garda Síochána was seeking to reopen matters which had already been ruled on as part of a previous High Court judicial review.
That resulted in an order prohibiting disciplinary action due to “inordinate and inexcusable delay”.
The court heard that the investigation had not been progressed to date.
Mr Justice Seamus Noonan said he would give Gda Harrison leave to seek a judicial review.
The matter is due back in court next month.