From top: Garda Commissioner Nóirin O’Sullivan; Senator Michael McDowell
This morning.
In the Seanad.
Senator McDowell said that Ms O’Sullivan should step aside “for the duration of the tribunal until it has reported, or permanently’’.
Mr McDowell said it was totally inconceivable that officers, including senior officers of a disciplined force, should be asked in public to accuse the person in charge of them of grave misbehaviour in evidence to a public inquiry.
He said it would be difficult for them to instruct counsel to cross-examine that person as to her honestly, reliability and suitability for office.
Mr McDowell said the public should not be judge and jury in the matter.
“However, the rights of all persons and the public to fairness come first,’’ he added. “The determination that the commissioner should remain in place during the tribunal is neither fair, nor appropriate nor defensible.”
Michael McDowell calls on Garda Commissioner to stand aside (Irish Times)
Previously: How Did he Get Here?
Rollingnews
She’ll reflect on her position over the weekend I’d say…..
News, yes she’ll be gone by Monday.
However a tribunal will ensure the there will be no criminal prescutions in respect of those who are responsible for this poo.
Thank you McDowell, about time someone told her to stand aside
He’s right of course, and if it doesn’t happen now there will be a judicial review that will prompt it
A judicial review you say?
I do
What on earth are you talking about? That doesn’t make any sense.
it makes perfect sense if you know what judicial review is for
Let’s say there IS a judicial review, how is that going to prompt her to stand aside now? This thing could trundle on for months or years.
The only reason she will stand aside now is if she is ordered to do so by her superiors.
Tribunals don’t fire people.
Ah if it isn’t the Senator who doesn’t think the senate should exist and who torpedoed the CPI, called the racist referendum and so on… what a champ! All the moral authority of Sister Asumpta with her face covered in chocolate (not that he’s wrong).
so… you don’t agree with him?
he does agree with him
he just doesn’t like him
but, in fairness, what the senator is saying is hardly controversial or wacky, so we can probably dismiss that and just focus on his smarmy insincerity and general nastiness
I’d say he’s very sincere to be fair, but can be fairly nasty alright
I would strongly disagree. and base this view on a comparison of his compassionate and pragmatic attitude towards asylum seekers when he was a newspaper columnist in the 1990s and his unfair, inhumane treatment of asylum seekers when he became minister of justice a decade or so later. an utter volte face.
he’s a horrible, lying boo-boo
“boo-boo”…?
Stinky ning-nong moderation, even for broadsheet.
no, I actually did say “boo boo”
it’s an insult I reserve for moments when I’m especially annoyed. I also jump up and down and punch my own hips.
Do you stamp your foot when you’re frustrated?
(They got me too, you know)
ladypart male appendage fupp testes
Precisely.
so “testes” is ok but “testicles” is not?
Ah lads well done. I had a proper lol at that.
But don’t think that’s put me off.
We held a racist referendum? Must have missed that one.
To remove automatic right to citizenship for people born in Ireland.
It’s disgraceful. We should start on repealing it once we get the 8th out of the way.
Not racist.
KNYC, I disagreed with it & disagree with it still but it is a bit far to say it is racist.
It did bring Ireland’s law on the matter into line with most other European countries.
I agree with you. Opposed the referendum, but it was not racist.
It was called because some people got hysterical about Nigerian women supposedly coming to Ireland pregnant, having a baby there and then being able to stay because their child was Irish.
No one was worried about English women or American women doing this.
It was entirely racist.
McDowell is right but the Irish Times should say that he has acted for Maurice McCabe to give full context. That would require some prior knowledge or basic journalistic research though.
that was in an earlier version of the article online
odd that it has since been removed
sure might aswell see if bertie & blair want to chimetheFin while we’re at it.
He is a public figure, a respected barrister (like it or not) and a former minister for justice.
I’d have thought he’s about as well qualified as anybody to comment, no?
Not just O’Sullivan, but several others who will be the subject of the inquiry should be made stand aside too. An outsider should be brought in the perform the function in the intervening period, or a civilian with no connection with the cops.
I seem to recall McDowell was annoyed with the Gardai in the past when details concerning his son’s assault was leaked to the press.
Something I found very interesting was:
During the O’ Higgins commission enquiry two Gardai gave evidence (presumably under oath) that they had met with M. McCabe and that during the meeting McCabe said his complaints were mischievous, only made to get at another office. Fortunately McCabe had taped the conversation and was therefore able to prove that those witnesses were in fact lying under oath.
This would seem to me to be hugely significant. However O’ Higgins failed to mention any of this in his report.
To me this asks a question regarding the impartiality of the good judge in the matter.
Furthermore these two officers, it appears, were not investigated by O’ Sullivan for their actions.
All most curious indeed.
Agreed.
The O’Higgins report was bunk.