THE ACQUITTAL of Garda Brendan Whitty in the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court on a charge of assault causing harm, while arresting Keith Murphy in Dublin three years ago, is to be welcomed. Following a thorough and independent investigation into the incident by the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) and a six-day trial in open court, a jury found that the amount of force used by Garda Whitty was lawful. Justice was seen to be done and the reputation of the Garda Síochána as a disciplined force has been protected.
This was a difficult case. Mr Murphy died some hours after being arrested. The jury was told his death had been caused by a drugs overdose and not by the alleged assault. In such circumstances – and particularly after events in Co Donegal in the 1990s – there are those who would automatically suspect cover-ups and worse. That is why the GSOC was established. Its function is to investigate serious public complaints and any fatal incident involving a member of the force. As a result of its investigation in this particular case and the testimony of a number of eye witnesses, it sent a file to the Director of Public Prosecutions who decided that a court hearing was warranted.
The response by the Garda Representative Association (GRA) to the verdict was predictable. Vindication for Garda Whitty was not enough. It could not resist playing to the gallery and criticising the disciplinary arrangements under which its members are required to operate. It faulted the “excessive” and “oppressive” manner in which members of the GSOC had conducted the investigation and called on the Minister for Justice to hold a judicial inquiry.
In the past, executive members of the GRA were criticised by the Morris tribunal for obstructing Garda authorities when they attempted to impose discipline on out-of-control members. In those dark times, some gardaí came to believe their primary allegiance was to colleagues rather than to the rule of law. Since then, fundamental reforms of Garda structures and disciplinary procedures have been introduced.
Rather than complain about a strict and necessary disciplinary regime that is designed to forestall future scandals, the GRA should recognise the greater good that has been achieved in this instance. That public confidence in law and order has been secured is in the best interests of the community at large and of the membership the GRA was set up to represent.