The Oireachtas subcommittee investigating the shooting dead by gardaí of Mr John Carthy last year was today accused of concealment which amounted to "an abuse of process and an abuse of power".
|
Mr John Rogers SC, representing members of the Garda Emergency Respose Unit (ERU) presented evidence to the High Court of what he claimed was the deliberate concealment of information.
Had this information been known on April 24th 2001 - the first day of the subcommittee’s hearing of the case - it would have made it unnecessary for members of the ERU to attend, Mr Rogers suggested.
Mr Rogers, claimed the subcommittee knowingly proceeded with the hearing on the basis that it had consent to do so on April 24th, when in fact official consent was only guaranteed on April 30th.
Mr Rogers said the "on appro" (on approval) nature of the consent was deliberately deleted from the e-mailed notice and said it did not have the necessary backing of the Seanad and the Daíl.
He said: "a subcommittee of the Oireachtas is concealing from citizens that they needn’t have presented themselves". He said his clients now had a claim for damages.
Earlier today Mr Rogers said questions asked at the Abbeylara Inquiry this year amounted to allegations of unlawful killing and implicated one of his clients.
He told the court the inquiry had been "proceeding in entirely the wrong way" as questions had been put to the Garda Commissioner Mr Pat Byrne based on unproven facts.
Mr Rogers also said he had not been forewarned that questions would be put by Deputy Alan Shatter to the Garda Commissioner which, he said, criticised his clients.
There was now, he said, an issue of fair procedure to be dealt with and insisted: "This is not the way to conduct an inquiry".
Mr Rogers also claimed that although it was "fundamental that death be investigated appropriately", the parliamentary sub-committee was the wrong setting for the inquiry and suggested a public tribunal of inquiry would have been the more appropriate forum.
Mr Carthy was shot four times by members of the ERU after a siege at his home. In May, the judicial review proceedings, in which virtually all aspects of the inquiry's work are challenged, were taken.
The case continues tomorrow.