A Garda has lost his High Court claim that fair procedures were not applied in disciplining him over an incident where he gave a driver a speeding ticket and then followed him in a patrol car for 11 miles before stopping him again for alleged speeding.
Garda John P McGovern, of Ennis Garda Station, asked the High Court to find the Garda Complaints Board and the Garda Commissioner were not entitled to say a complaint by the motorist involved was minor and could be dealt with by informal admonition of him or by advice from a superior.
He argued the classification of the alleged breaches of discipline was so serious it constituted criminal offences and he was entitled to have the matter referred to a tribunal to establish the truthfulness of the motorist's complaint.
The case arose after the Garda stopped the motorist at Barefield, Ennis, around midnight on February 17th, 2004. It was alleged he issued a fixed penalty notice to the motorist who claimed he had not been shown proof of speeding.
The man drove off and was followed by Garda McGovern for 11 miles before being stopped again for alleged speeding.
The motorist lodged a complaint with Garda McGovern's superintendent, who referred it to the Garda Complaints Board which found the matter was minor and could be dealt with by an admonition or warning from his superiors.
An investigating officer apointed by the Garda Comissioner subsequently found Garda McGovern had breached discipline by making an entry into an official document which was false or misleading.
The investigator also found that Garda McGovern, by issuing a fixed penalty notice "despite being aware that he (motorist) had not broken the speed limit", had engaged in discreditable conduct and had "malicious intent" by following the motorist for 11 miles.
Garda McGovern appealed to his Chief Superintendent in Ennis who, in his advice/admonition to the garda, found the history of two stops within an 11-mile gap appeared to be "events excessive."
It was the policy of the Garda Commissioner that road traffic law should be delivered in a "caring, professional and conflict free manner," the notice from the Superintendent to Garda McGovern stated.
Garda McGovern subsequently brought High Court judicial review proceedings seeking to have the disciplinary procedures quashed claiming they would be a serious blemish on his record. He argued he was denied fair procedures.
Today, Mr Justice Iarfhlaith O'Neill said he was satisfied the Garda Complaints Board had closely followed procedural requirements laid down by law. He ruled an oral hearing as requested by Garda McGovern would have "contributed little or nothing" to assisting a resolution of the issues arising in the disciplinary proceedings.
He was also satisfied the Garda Complaints Board had not made any adverse finding against Garda McGovern and that the procedures adopted by the Commissioner did not breach the Garda's right to natural justice. It was open to the Complaints Board to reach the opinion it formed and also open to the Commissioner to dispose of the matter by giving the advice he had.
While he could see the reason for Garda McGovern's heightened sense of grievance as the statement of charges against him went to the extremity of charges which could be brought and this might be deeply offensive to the garda, it was nonetheless a legitimate exercise on the part of the framer of the charges to encompass the widest and worst aspects of conduct, the judge added.