The High Court has refused to stop the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) investigating a complaint alleging that Garda members concealed failings in an investigation of an assault on Mary Lynch.
In a judgment delivered on 26 May 2016, Mr Justice Max Barrett ruled that the complaint was different from an earlier complaint about how the assault investigation was conducted. The court refused all the reliefs sought by Garda Pádraig McEvoy, including orders to quash the admissibility decision and prohibit further investigation.
The earlier complaint was discontinued in October 2011 because GSOC had not considered whether there were good reasons to extend the time limit for making it. GSOC told McEvoy it would take no further action in relation to that complaint. In May 2012, he received a disciplinary caution arising from his involvement in the assault investigation. A later internal investigation found him not to be in breach of the relevant regulations.
Lynch contacted GSOC again in October 2012 after, she said, Sergeant Maurice McCabe had told her about a recording of a conversation with McEvoy. She made a formal written complaint in January 2013, alleging that Garda members had lied to cover up mistakes in the investigation. The complaint included an allegation that McEvoy had lied about not knowing who ordered the release of the man accused of assaulting her. These were allegations, not findings by the High Court.
GSOC recorded admissibility decisions in September and November 2013 and notified McEvoy in November. The court considered the second complaint admissible and said it concerned an alleged cover-up based on new information, rather than simply repeating the earlier complaint that the investigation itself had been flawed. The earlier complaint had ended for procedural reasons without a final decision on its merits, the judge said.
The judge criticised the eight-to-ten-month period GSOC took to determine admissibility, describing it as surprisingly long and close to failing the requirement of reasonable expedition. But McEvoy had not shown specific prejudice from the delay, and the court said the wider public interest in investigating alleged Garda misbehaviour also had to be considered.
The court held that the alleged cover-up was said to be ongoing, so the complaint was not out of time and no extension was needed. It also rejected McEvoy’s arguments based on res judicata, the statutory bar on further action after an inadmissibility decision, and legitimate expectation. The ruling addressed whether the investigation could proceed; it did not decide whether the allegations were true.