Three Options available for probe into Banking meltdown

Dannyboy83

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/three-options-available-for-probe-into-meltdown-1988282.html

THE near systemic meltdown of the Irish banking system has led to calls for a public inquiry.

Calling for a public inquiry is the easy part.

But agreeing on the form that inquiry should take is another, owing to entrenched political resistance and the perceived constitutional barriers. There are three possible types of inquiry that the government could consider:

1 Full-scale tribunal of inquiry

The least likely option following decades, literally, of cumbersome and expensive tribunals of inquiry such as the Beef, McCracken, Mahon and Moriarty tribunals.

The various tribunal extravaganzas have also been undermined by a series of leaks and seemingly endless judicial reviews in the Four Courts.

PROS: Led by judges.

Public hearing.

Powers of compellability.

CONS: Costly, time-consuming and widely perceived to be a gravy train for lawyers. Vulnerable to political attacks.

2 Commission of investigation

The Commissions of Investigations Act was introduced in the wake of the Cardinal Secrets programme in 1992.

PROS: Led by a judge.

Private hearings.

Produces a final report within a set period, usually 18 months.

CONS: Private hearings. But this model's major attraction, secrecy, is also its greatest flaw.

The public are unlikely to agree to an in-camera investigation.

3 Oireachtas inquiry

The most likely option. However, the powers of such an inquiry have been stymied by a 2002 Supreme Court ruling on the Abbeylara killing. The investigative zeal of Oireachtas committees peaked in the aftermath of the hugely successful 1999 DIRT tax inquiry.

But that all changed with the Supreme Court ruling in the Abbeylara case.

In theory, the PAC -- which has offered to undertake the task -- has at its disposal tribunal-style powers of compellability to force witnesses to attend public hearings or face a fine or prison term. In practice, however, it relies on the voluntary co-operation of witnesses.

It can apply to the High Court to compel a witness to appear and, if successful, can direct a person to appear before it. The powers appear significant.

But the Abbeylara case limited the powers of Dail committees after a failed bid by an Oireachtas sub-committee to investigate the shooting of John Carty in Abbeylara. The Supreme Court ruled that the Oireachtas could not conduct an inquiry which could lead to "adverse findings of fact and conclusions" in relation to someone who is not a TD.

PROS: Televised hearings.

Could succeed with strong terms of reference, including powers to compel witnesses.

CONS: Led by politicians.

Cannot make adverse findings.

May trespass the civil-criminal divide.

- Dearbhail McDonald Legal Editor

Irish Independent

Why type of probe would be the best for this country at this time and why?
Or feel free to recommend a better type

Maserati23

None of the above mention straight criminal court. I.E. Prison if found Guilty!!!!!!


Thats what Irish people want. Cut through the lower upper class divides and jail the culprits.

Nothing would make me happier.:)

nesf

Maserati23 wrote: »

None of the above mention straight criminal court. I.E. Prison if found Guilty!!!!!!


Thats what Irish people want. Cut through the lower upper class divides and jail the culprits.

Nothing would make me happier.:)

Eh, that's already being done by the Fraud Squad and other elements of the Gardaí. Criminal investigations are ongoing etc and really aren't the business of the Oireachtas thankfully.