Two garda∅ stationed in Arklow, Co Wicklow, have taken High Court proceedings alleging they have been unfairly treated by their superior officers.
The case has its roots in allegations of misconduct and breaches of the criminal law which were made in 1992 by Catherine Nevin, now serving a life sentence for the murder of her husband, Tom, and by a young girl. A letter of complaint allegedly written by that girl was later found to be a forgery.
Both garda∅ were suspended while an investigation of the complaints was made.
A file was sent to the DPP, who directed there should be no prosecution of either garda, and their suspension was lifted on May 20th, 1994.
Yesterday Mr Patrick Keane SC, for Garda Michael Murphy (43) and Garda Vincent Whelan (42), said there was no slur on the characters of either of his clients, or on their conduct as garda∅. But they had been constantly under the shadow of allegations and suspicions by their superiors and felt they had been victimised and discriminated against to the extent they had had to bring a third set of proceedings to receive "normal" treatment.
In their judicial review proceedings against the Garda Commissioner, which continue today, both garda∅, who are back on normal duties, are seeking a declaration that they have been unfairly treated by their superiors.
Mr Keane said that on July 23rd 1992, Garda Murphy was suspended from duties and on February 5th, 1993, Garda Whelan was also suspended. On May 20th, 1994, both suspensions were ended.
Both garda∅ had initiated judicial review proceedings challenging their suspensions. The High Court in August 1994 refused them damages. From May 18th, 1995, they were permitted to resume full duties.
They had been told it was proposed to transfer Garda Murphy to Carlow and Garda Whelan to Enniscorthy. They took a second set of judicial review proceedings against these enforced transfers.
The essence of those judicial review proceedings and of the proposed transfers was that the Garda authorities had received a letter from a female complaining about the conduct of both of them, Mr Keane said. It was eventually found, and was admitted by the State, that that letter was a forgery.
On November 2nd, 1995, the proposed transfers were set aside by consent, and the State agreed to pay the costs of the second set of proceedings.
On November 29th, 1995, the two garda∅ were told they were to be confined to indoor duties and were refused reasons for that decision.
The garda∅ argued this was a "retaliation" against them for winning their challenge to their proposed transfers.
The garda∅ then took their third set of proceedings.
They had also complained about how they were treated by District Judge Donnacha ╙ Buachalla.
An inquiry relating to their allegations against the judge was due to begin on July 5th, 2000 but on the previous day they were told, without any explanation, that they were to return to normal duties. Both garda∅ withdrew their complaints against the judge.
