Prison officer contests dismissal over phones

A PRISON officer who denies he trafficked mobile phones to inmates has brought a High Court challenge to a recommendation he …

A PRISON officer who denies he trafficked mobile phones to inmates has brought a High Court challenge to a recommendation he should be dismissed from his employment.

Liam Hynan, from Co Limerick, was suspended from his job at Wheatfield Prison and subject to disciplinary hearings in early 2007 on foot of allegations he had trafficked mobile phones to prisoners. The claims were made after two phones were found in a box which Mr Hynan used for storage.

Mr Hynan has denied the claims and has brought judicial review proceedings against the Minister for Justice and Law Reform and Derek Brennan, a prison governor, aimed at quashing Mr Brennan’s decision of October 5th, 2009, recommending Mr Hynan’s dismissal.

He is also seeking injunctions prohibiting the defendants holding fresh proceedings in respect of the same charges.

READ MORE

After a disciplinary hearing in September and October 2009, Mr Brennan concluded Mr Hynan was guilty of the trafficking charge and recommended to the Minister he be dismissed, the court heard.

Mr Hynan claims the hearing was flawed and in breach of his right to fair procedures. He claims Mr Brennan prejudged a material issue of fact and carried out an investigation with another prison officer who, unknown to Mr Hynan, had made a formal complaint against Mr Hynan.

The defendants deny Mr Hynan’s claims and contend he received a fair hearing.

Yesterday, Roddy Horan SC, for Mr Hynan, said two mobile phones found in his client’s possession had been confiscated from a prisoner in Wheatfield on dates in April and October 2006. Mr Hynan had not reported the matter to his superiors, as he should have done, because the prisoner in question “menaced him”, counsel said.

As Mr Hynan was about to write a report about the discovery of the mobile phone in April 2006, the prisoner involved, Paul Fitzgerald, told him not to because he did not want his application to be repatriated to the UK “messed up”.

Counsel said Fitzgerald gave Mr Hynan details of the officer’s family’s address and added he “knew people in Limerick”. On the second occasion when Mr Hynan found another phone, Fitzgerald said that phone was his and again told him not to file a report. Fitzgerald also gave details including the home address of Mr Hynan’s then girlfriend, counsel said.

Mr Hynan was shocked. He panicked and did not report the matter, Mr Horan said.

In early 2007, Mr Hynan was accused of trafficking material to prisoners. Following a search of his locker, the box containing the two mobile phones was discovered and he was suspended.

Issues surrounding a disciplinary hearing into the allegations were the subject of separate legal proceedings. When those matters were settled, the disciplinary hearing was held during which it emerged Mr Brennan had inspected the location within the prison where Mr Hynan said he was seen by Fitzgerald filling out the form recording the possession of the mobile phone, counsel said. Mr Brennan had stated the visibility in that part of the prison implied the prisoner had “most extraordinary eyesight” and seemed to have prejudged the matter.