There has been an unacceptable lack of consultation by the Government with Defence Forces representatives around legislative reforms on the suspension and dismissal of officers, an Oireachtas committee has heard.
Representatives “remain very concerned by the loose, vague, and indeed subjective language” in the drafted Defence (Amendment) Bill 2025. The Bill establishes provisions for when an officer is under investigation by An Garda Síochána.
“It is unacceptable that legislation is drafted by our employers and sent to Cabinet without any consultation with supposedly valued stakeholders,” the general secretary of the Representative Association of Commissioned Officers (RACO) said.
Lieut Col Conor King told the Oireachtas committee on defence and national security on Thursday that “a lack of consultation and exploitation of our employer’s dominant position is something we continue to encounter on a regular basis”.
READ MORE
The proposed Bill seeks to introduce a clause so “an officer may, for any prescribed reason, be dismissed by the President”.
“This marks a shift towards a more open-ended basis for dismissal, with the criteria to be set out in future regulations rather than clearly defined in primary legislation,” Lieut Col King said. “You can prescribe reasons, but you must prescribe them in detail,” he said.
Lieut Col King said RACO recognised and accepted the need for the Defence Forces to maintain high standards and the capacity to address serious misconduct. However, he said “the phrase ‘any prescribed reason’ is too broad [and] lacks the clarity and safeguards necessary to protect members from arbitrary or disproportionate action”.
The Bill also seeks to allow for the suspension of an officer below the rank of major-general when “it appears to the suspending authority” that public interest, national security, or the best interest of the Defence Forces “might be prejudiced by allowing the officer to remain on duty”.
“Such phrasing lacks the thoroughness and rigour needed to protect members’ rights to the presumption of innocence”. He said it “opens the door to interpretation without robust oversight or even an appeal mechanism”.
He recognised the need for reform in this area, saying “there are no suspensions in the Defence Forces. There’s local leave, there’s special leave, gardening leave, there’s ‘don’t come into the barracks’. But there’s nothing on paper”.
Suspensions could seem indefinite at times, he said, as investigations can last up to two years. “Suspension, particularly in advance of due process, carries real consequences for an individual’s mental health and professional reputation. The principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ must be protected.”
References to officers accused of sexual assault were made throughout the committee hearing. The Bill also seeks to require an officer under criminal investigation by the gardaí or charged before a civil court to inform their commanding officer of this “as soon as practicable”.
It would also mandate the officer to “keep his or her commanding officer informed of any significant developments relating to the charge”.
RACO representatives said this was problematic as the onus is on the accused to inform about an investigation that the commander may not be aware is ongoing. The commander may be unaware as there is no formal data sharing mechanism between gardaí and the Defence Forces on these matters.
This amendment would see “a significant and unnecessary increase in total suspensions of members where lesser or more considered action would be appropriate”, Lieut Col King said. This could include relocation within a barracks or a remote working option, during an investigation.
