Some 130 local gardai in Limerick were 'interrogated' on alleged squaring of traffic fines

A TOTAL of 130 gardaí in the Limerick division have been “interrogated” in relation to the alleged squaring of road traffic fines, a local TD has said.

Fianna Fail TD for Clare, Cathal Crowe, made the claim in the Joint Committee on Justice debate at which garda commissioner Drew Harris was called to give evidence.

Referring to officers in the Limerick division, Mr Crowe said: “Their laptops and mobile phones were seized. This all relates to the squaring of road traffic fines.”

The “squaring” of road traffic fines or penalty points generally refers to penalty points that have intentionally not been processed in the correct way.

The National Bureau of Criminal Investigation have been undertaking an investigation into these alleged wrongdoings.

Mr Crowe used what is known as Dáil privilege to make the claims.

This is a mechanism which allows those taking part in parliamentary business the ability to make comments, free from the threat of legal action.

Mr Harris, the most senior garda in Ireland, did not dispute the number put forward by Mr Crowe.

The Clare TD told the Joint Committee on Justice debate that 113 officers are currently suspended nationwide.

'The sky's the limit': Verizon boss explains company move to open in Limerick

“The number suspended equates to half the total garda cohort in my county. One can imagine the difference having 113 gardaí on the street somewhere - be it Ennis, Dublin or anywhere in Ireland - would make in terms of policing, instead of having them at home, not using the skills they acquired in Templemore, being fully paid to sit at home while suspended. It's amoral and it is a failure. The National Bureau of Criminal Investigation needs to move this on.”

Commissioner Harris's attendance at the debate came in the wake of the Dublin riots. Responding to Mr Crowe’s point on suspensions, he said these are “a matter of last resort”.

“Every single one of these cases is considered very carefully,” he said.

“These are under three-month review. If any new facts emerges, then they are under immediate review. It is a precautionary measure in terms of public confidence in the organisation but also in respect of the inquiry itself and the preservation of the integrity of that inquiry.”