The High Court rejected Brian Ó Dómhnaill’s challenge to the process for a Standards in Public Office Commission investigation into his expenses, holding that the Commission was acting on a formal complaint from Donegal County Council’s mayor and county manager, not investigating the original anonymous complaint.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Gearóid Ó hÓgáin on 13 January 2014, addressed three issues in Ó Dómhnaill’s judicial review proceedings. The source identifies him as a senator and public representative, and a former member of Donegal County Council.
An anonymous letter sent in August 2011 alleged possible double claims for travel and subsistence expenses relating to meetings and conferences. After inquiries by the council and Údarás na Gaeltachta, the mayor and county manager made a formal complaint to the Commission in May 2012. The Commission decided in November 2012 to begin an investigation under the Standards in Public Office Act 2001.
The court said the law barred the Commission from investigating a complaint whose maker’s identity had not been disclosed. It found, however, that the complaint before the Commission was the one made by the two named officials under the Local Government Act 2001. The anonymous letter had prompted the earlier examination, but was not itself the complaint under investigation. The court therefore held that the Commission had not acted contrary to the statutory prohibition.
Ó Dómhnaill also argued that the Commission’s members needed fluency in both official languages for a fair process. The court rejected that argument. It said he was entitled to give evidence in Irish, while Commission members could use English with translation facilities available. The judgment acknowledged that interpretation creates a barrier between a witness and decision-maker, but found no statutory requirement for Commission members to be bilingual.
The court did not decide whether the Official Languages Act 2003 required the Commission’s lawyers to correspond in Irish. It said the lawyers had in fact replied in Irish after Ó Dómhnaill’s representative stated in March 2013 that he wished to conduct correspondence in Irish.
The judgment records the court’s conclusions on those three issues. It does not set out a separate operative order granting or refusing leave or specifying the ultimate disposition of the judicial review application.