No more secrets at Justice department
Scandal over failure to disclose documents and emails leads to creation of new ‘transparency unit’
THE Department of Justice is creating a new ‘transparency unit’ after repeated controversies over its handling of Garda scandals and the disclosure of documents.
The unit is being created to manage all information requests made to the department centrally so that officials can provide a better service to the public.
The move comes after a string of controversies over their handling of requests, including the delayed disclosure of records to the Charleton Tribunal and the failure to find more than 100 emails between the personal office of former minister Frances Fitzgerald and PR adviser Terry Prone.
The department said it has now introduced specialised software so that staff can trawl records more effectively.
A spokesman said this would allow officials to look at ‘a wide timeframe and involve multiple email accounts, which in some cases may involve accessing archived email accounts’.
Records obtained under FOI reveal that additional training and guidance was being offered to staff to make it easier to deal with requests. The new unit will be used to help Minister Charlie Flanagan ‘fulfil his obligation of democratic accountability’, internal correspondence explains. It will mean quicker and more consistent responses when the department is asked questions and lead to a ‘much better and transparent service’.
Separately, the department considered going to the High Court about whether they were obliged to contact Frances Fitzgerald to ask for copies of emails held in her private email address. Officials had sought legal advice from the Attorney General on whether they could be forced to ask Ms Fitzgerald to search for emails between her and PR adviser Terry Prone. An official wrote: ‘I have advice from the AGO [Attorney General Office] supporting the position that it would not be appropriate for us to contact her in relation to this matter.’ However, in a submission to Mr Flanagan, the department’s deputy secretary general warned it might just draw attention to their failure to find the records in the first place.
A briefing written by Oonagh McPhillips said: ‘It will be necessary to consider whether this particular matter should be appealed (to the High Court).
‘My preliminary view is that this may not be appropriate in these circumstances, in light of… guidelines, the Information Commissioner’s findings and, in particular, the significant number of records identified.” In a letter to Ms Fitzgerald, the department said it had refused two requests for information – including a second one from Fianna Fáil – claiming no records existed.
It said: ‘In keeping with usual practice, your private secretary searched your own departmental email account. The request was forwarded to your special advisers in respect of any records that they had which would fall within the scope of the request; they indicated there were no such records.’
Afterwards, the department discovered there was actually 185 records in its email system.
‘The Information Commissioner has also directed the department to ask you whether you hold additional records,’ it told Ms Fitzgerald, ‘including in non-official sources such as your gmail account’.
Ms Fitzgerald subsequently disclosed 30 records but said some relating to ‘internal Fine Gael business’ were confidential and commercially sensitive. Others had already been found during the trawl of her departmental emails.
She wrote: ‘I have no difficulty whatsoever responding to the request and have identified a small amount of material that may potentially fall within it.’
The documents also reveal that concerns arose in the department that additional records relevant to the work of the Charleton Tribunal could be discovered.
Ms McPhillips told Mr Flanagan that one draft speech had been found relating to publication of the O’Higgins Report into Garda whistle-blower claims.
She said: ‘For completeness I’ve asked Policing Division to consult counsel about whether this record needs to be sent to the tribunal.’
It was later found that Ms Fitzgerald had disclosed the document ‘ahead of her evidence’ in the tribunal.
‘Officials could look at a wide timeframe’ ‘Advisers indicated there were no such records’