Gardai believe the Oireachtas subcommittee into the death of Mr John Carthy at Abbeylara, Co Longford, is biased against them, the High Court has been told. The gardai were also "outraged" at the subcommittee's treatment of their lawyers during hearings.
Mr Donal O'Donnell SC, for 36 gardai challenging the subcommittee, yesterday said questions put to senior Garda officers during hearings of the subcommittee suggested there was a determination of unlawful killing. Other questions suggested there was collusion by gardai to avoid such a determination.
He contended that the subcommittee had no jurisdiction or entitlement to pursue this "admittedly novel" and adjudicative function where it was insisting that it could make findings of fact which might be adverse to the good name of a citizen.
Yesterday was the fourth day of the challenge by the gardai to the inquiry of the subcommittee of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights into the death of Mr Carthy at Abbeylara on April 20th, 2000. Mr Carthy was shot four times by members of the Emergency Response Unit after a siege at his home.
The subcommittee was established last March and began public hearings on April 24th. It had to adjourn on April 30th after nine members of the ERU indicated that they were applying for immunity from appearing before it. The judicial review proceedings by the gardai were taken last May and the subcommittee remains suspended pending the outcome of these.
In a lengthy affidavit, Mr Thomas Murphy, solicitor for the gardai, denied that the subcommittee had the required statutory basis and consents to pursue hearings resulting in findings of fact which might be adverse to the good name of citizens. It was not within the subcommittee's remit to identify issues involving findings of fact relating to the shooting of Mr Carthy or to resolve conflicts of fact.
He rejected an assertion by the subcommittee chairman, Mr Sean Ardagh, that the gardai's claims that the subcommittee did not have the required consent on April 12th last to direct the attendance of witnesses before it were "technical". If the objections were "technical", this was to ensure compliance with the rule of law, he said.
Mr Murphy said Mr Alan Shatter had, prior to serving on the subcommittee, expressed on television his views and opinion in relation to the death of Mr John Carthy and had clearly implied that, as Mr Carthy had been shot in the back, very serious questions needed to be asked as to why that occurred. In those circumstances, Mr Murphy said, he did not believe Mr Shatter could bring an open, unbiased, objective and impartial consideration to the matters being inquired into.
The hearing resumes on Tuesday.