Tag Archives: Penalty Point report

4/3/2010 Alan Shatter At Dail


Independent TD Mattie McGrath this morning asked Tanaiste Eamon Gilmore if he knew if Alan Shatter [before he became Justice Minister] had been stopped at a garda checkpoint, asked to produce a specimen of breath and if his subsequent behaviour and reaction to this request was “appropriate and indeed cordial?”.

Mr McMcGrath also asked if Mr Gilmore knew if Mr Shatter had attempted to use the TDs’ privilege of immunity from traffic charges while travelling to and from the Dail “as a means of avoiding the breath test”.


New Shatter controversy as questions raised in Dail about garda checkpoint incident (Michael Brennan, Irish Independent)

(Photocall Ireland)


Elaine Byrne has some of her own points to raise with the Justice Mininster:

1. The Taoiseach told the IrishTimes that Mr Shatter has his “100 per cent support” for disclosing the information.

2. Enda Kenny had a different view in the Dail on 13 Dec 2005 during the Michael McDowell / Frank Connelly episode.

3.To quote from Enda Kenny’s questioning of the then Taoiseach about leaking of confidental info by then Minister for Justice.

4. “Were the Taoiseach & other members of the Cabinet & Gov made aware that the Minister for Justice intended to leak information deliberately..”

5. It should not be necessary for a Minister, particularly Minister for Justice, to deliberately leak information to a sole journalist…”

6. “Does the Taoiseach agree that… the method chosen by the Minister for Justice, is not in keeping with the integrity of his office?”

7. Hypocrisy is the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behaviour does not conform.

8. From that same Dail debate in 2005, Labour’s Pat Rabbitte’s contribution is worth repeating. Has the Minister made any comment, yet?

9. Rabbitte: “What I want to know is whether the Taoiseach stands over the untrammelled & unreviewable use of executive power… to leak a document”

More here.

Previously: Shatter Proof


18/05/2013. Garda Memorial Day. Minister for Justi



Will Shatter pay the penalty for hypocrisy? (Harry McGee, Irish Times)

Wallace To Lodge Complaint Over Shatter Remarks (RTE)

Previously: How Do You Know?

Shatter Proof


(Laura Hutton / Photocall Ireland)

4/5/2012 Campaigns European Stability Fiscal Treaties 17/7/2012 Courts Service Reports

Following on from last night’s ‘Prime Time’, Mick Wallace released a statement today which included the following:

I confirm that I am in the process of making a complaint on the matter to the Standards in Public Office Commission under Section 4 of the Standards in Public Office Act 2001.

I will also be requesting that the Data Protection Commissioner investigate any possible breach of the Data Protection legislation, the basis for the Minister’s allegation, the circumstances surrounding the seeking and providing of any personal data to the Minister in preparation for the Prime Time debate, and the identity and role of all persons involved.

Minister for Justice Alan Shatter subsequently released a statement which did not address Deputy Wallace’s accusation that the Minister’s actions constituted an abuse of power.

From whom did Minister Shatter receive his evidence of Mick Wallace’s alleged penalty points infringement?

Statement from Mick Wallace TD

Statement from Minister for Justice Alan Shatter TD

Earlier: Shatter Proof

Previously: How Did He Know?

(Sam Boal, Sasko Lazarov / Photocall Ireland)


An anonymous author created two documents containing allegations, pertaining to the last four years of serious corruption, destruction and erasing of records, perverting the course of justice, falsification and deception in the administration of penalty points.

On foot of these documents containing allegations, the Assistant Commissioner John O’Mahoney was appointed by the Commissioner to examine the allegations.

A time period of January 1, 2009 to June 30, 2012 was set and the allegations were whittled down to 189 separate allegations in total. It involved 113 Gardaí.

During this time frame, 37,384 fixed charge notices were terminated by officers exercising discretionary powers, or 10,701 per year.

This figure is 2.57% of a total 1.46 million fixed charge notices over this time.

It found:

“No evidence had been adduced to suggest any act of criminality, corruption, deception or falsification as alleged by the anonymous author.”

Assistant Commissioner John O’Mahoney’s report also found possible breaches of discipline by gardai, named as Superintendent A, Inspector B and Inspector C.

Mr O’Mahoney examined 661 terminations conducted by these three guards.

Files have been forwarded to the Assistant Commissioner, Internal
Affairs, the designated authority under the Disciplinary Regulations, for further

Mr O’Mahoney identified 2,198 fixed charge notice terminations within the ambit of the 189 allegations made by the whistleblower.

With this in mind, Mr O’Mahoney sidelined the 661 terminations related to A, B, and C, to prevent any prejudice in the disciplinary process, and focused on the remaining 1,537 terminations for his statistical analysis of the allegations.

Of the 1,537 terminations, Mr O’Mahoney found 1,339 (87%) were found to be within the correct administrative procedures while 198 (13%) were found not to have been strictly within administrative procedures.

38 (2.5%) were terminated automatically by the Fixed Charge Processing System as the offender was a juvenile.

241 (15.7%) were terminated under Data Entry Systems Error, while terminations relating to Garda members amounted to 123 (8%).

7 (0.5%) examined had an identifiable family connection to a member An Garda Síochána.

It concludes:

“Had the anonymous author access to more complete information he/she may have found perfectly reasonable and legitimate rationale for the termination of the greater majority of FCN’s he/she so forcefully alleges are corrupt and perverting of the course of justice.”

“On the basis of material examined and the documentation available and the enquiries conducted by this examination it can be clearly shown that allegations surrounding criminal conduct by any of the senior officers in question cannot be substantiated to any degree.”

The report here

Previously: The Penalty Points Whistleblower