The Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) is under renewed scrutiny, following revelations that it gained access to journalists’ phone records, supposedly in an attempt to track their informants. This issue has also recently erupted in Northern Ireland, with the police force there admitting to over 320 requests to view journalists’ communication records in the past 13 years. These records were investigated under the guise of unmasking their sources.
Both Amnesty International and the National Union of Journalists are urging for an investigation to take place, with the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) confirming a legal review is forthcoming. There’s potential for this issue to snowball further in the Republic, particularly if journalists located south of the border decide to take legal action against GSOC, the police watchdog.
To break it down, a number of Republic-based journalists, specialising in crime reportage, suspect that their phone records might have been examined. These suspicions were ignited following data subject access requests made to GSOC, the body responsible for probing claims of police misconduct.
These journalists hold that their telephone logs were inspected, without their acquiescence or knowledge, as part of probes into alleged media tip-offs originating within the Garda force.
In simpler terms, the public lodged complaints with GSOC alleging that police officers were leaking information to the media about them. To confirm this allegation, GSOC delved into the journalists’ phone records. This was done despite the journalists themselves not being the subjects of any accusations of misconduct.
Rather, their phone logs were casually examined and analysed to check if any police officers had possibly acted unethically by contacting the journalists at the time these supposed leakages occurred.
Under the law, both GSOC and the Garda force have the authority to clandestinely investigate phone records as part of their inquests. However, GSOC’s handling of this, and the fact that journalists’ records were inspected, even when no allegations were raised against them, is fuelling heated debates. This could potentially infringe upon their rights.
The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) ensures that journalists are protected, specifically regarding their sources. A rising number of Irish reporters are now contemplating legal action against the Garda oversight body, arguing that these specified rights have been violated.
In 2016, it came to light that Gsoc had looked into the phone records of journalists based in Dublin. This was in response to a complaint lodged by a companion of the late model Katy French, alleging that gardaí were unleashing confidential information. In 2015, the commission had been supplemented with Garda-like permissions to probe into phone logs as necessary for serious offence enquiries. The investigation into the grievances voiced by Katy French’s acquaintance marked the debut of the commission operating under these newfound prerogatives explicitly.
Several organisations, including the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors (AGSI), the Garda Representative Association (GRA), the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) and the National Union of Journalists (NUJ), aired their unease at this disclosure. Gsoc justified its decision to investigate reporters’ phones in their probe into alleged Garda leaks, emphasising that members of the public offering information would not anticipate seeing it relayed in the press.
Frances Fitzgerald, who was serving as justice minister at the time, commanded a re-evaluation of Gsoc’s practice of accessing journalists’ phone records. This came just after she voiced her approval for the disputed procedures. Despite this, these permissions have been sustained over the following years. Now, more journalists are mulling over legal remedies against Gsoc, possibly emboldened by similar investigations being uncovered in Northern Ireland.