Garda loses appeal over quashing of tribunal findings
THE Court of Appeal has dismissed Garda Keith Harrison’s bid to have Disclosures Tribunal findings quashed.
The Donegal-based garda was strongly criticised in two tribunal interim reports.
He took a legal challenge claiming objective bias on the part of tribunal chair Mr Justice Peter Charleton.
The allegation centred around a prior professional relationship with a Garda witness at the tribunal, Chief Superintendent Terry McGinn.
She had been the Garda liaison to the Morris Tribunal between 2002 and 2005 when Mr Justice Charleton was that tribunal’s senior counsel.
Last year, the High Court dismissed Gda Harrison’s challenge on the basis that “no reasonable person could have a reasonable apprehension of bias based on the overlapping working period”.
The court said the claim being made was one of objective bias only and that there was no suggestion made by the garda’s lawyers that the judge was in any way actually biased in the findings he made in the interim reports.
Gda Harrison appealed that decision, but was again unsuccessful yesterday.
In a ruling on behalf of a three-judge Court of Appeal, Mr Justice Seamus Noonan said it was satisfied the garda had not established a case of objective bias, and the High Court was correct in rejecting his claim.
In his action, the garda sought an order quashing findings in the reports insofar as they related to him.
Gda Harrison alleged he was the victim of a five-year intimidation campaign after arresting a fellow officer for drink driving in 2009.
He and his partner Marisa Simms had claimed she was compelled by gardaí to make a statement against him which led to a Tusla referral.
But Mr Justice Charleton said all the allegations made by them were “entirely without any validity”.
He also praised the conduct of Chief Supt McGinn and her management of the Donegal division.
Gda Harrison brought the proceedings after becoming aware of newspaper reports which showed a prior professional involvement between the judge and the chief superintendent at the Morris Tribunal.
But lawyers for the tribunal argued the proceedings were fundamentally misconceived.