The Irish Blood Transfusion Service has been ordered by the High Court not to appoint any person other than Mr Martin Hynes to the position of its chief executive officer or to act as such an officer.
The board was also ordered yesterday not to continue the suspension of Mr Hynes, imposed last Sunday, or to undertake any hearing of complaints made by the board's chairman in a letter to Mr Hynes on June 18th last. Mr Hynes alleged his suspension was unfair and unlawful and that there was "bad faith" by the IBTS chairman, Mr Michael McLoone.
He alleged that Mr McLoone had deliberately not informed the board last Thursday, June 20th, of a request from the Minister for Health made on June 19th to bring to the board's attention matters relating to the notification of certain donors and former donors to the IBTS, notwithstanding the relevance of the Minister's request to Mr Hynes's own decision requesting the regional director of the IBTS to take administrative leave.
The temporary injunctions, returnable to Monday next, were granted by Mr Justice Smyth to Mr Brian O'Moore SC, for Mr Hynes (58), Pebble Hill, Maynooth, Co Kildare, who was appointed c.e.o. of the IBTS on July 1st, 1998.
In an affidavit, Mr Hynes said the immediate circumstances which gave rise to his application for the injunctions arose last Friday when he received a letter from the acting chairman of the IBTS saying he would be suspended on full pay from last Sunday until July 10th, the date of the next board meeting.
At that meeting, the board expected to be able to deal with all matters arising out of complaints against him which were being formulated by Mr McLoone.
Mr Hynes said his suspension was entirely without justification and in clear contravention of his contract of employment.
If the suspension was not lifted, he would suffer irrevocable damage to his reputation and employment prospects, and his career with the IBTS would be irretrievably damaged. The suspension concerned allegations about his performance in relation to implementing the organisational development programme for the IBTS.
Even if his performance in that regard was not satisfactory, which he strenuously disputed, there was no justification for suspending him to enable a review to take place.
Mr Hynes noted the IBTS had been subject to significant public scrutiny since 1994. A reorganisation plan was approved in April 1996. Other changes included the establishment of the Lindsay tribunal (which has yet to report).
There had been considerable controversy about a perceived lack of cohesion at board level. The chairman resigned in August 2001 over a row about the proposed transfer of blood-testing from Cork to Dublin and other issues.
The tensions in the IBTS and the ongoing problems being experienced predated his appointment and were long-standing, he added.
Among the challenges facing the IBTS since his appointment were a significant shortage of blood, the implementation of the Finlay report recommendations and preparation for and participation in the Lindsay tribunal.
Since his appointment, he believed, confidence in the IBTS had been largely restored through a policy of open and transparent communication with staff, the public and those with an interest in the IBTS. Considerable improvements had been made. Blood supplies were adequate, and the IBTS now operated the safest testing and processing procedures in the world.
Mr Hynes said an issue arose recently involving a decision, with the full agreement of the board, to contact some former donors about a highly sensitive and important matter. The importance of communicating with those donors had been agreed with the Department of Health, Transfusion Positive, Positive Action and the board by the national medical director, Dr William Murphy.
He said Dr Murphy had contacted the regional director of the IBTS seeking the addresses of the former donors. The regional director had said she would not make the addresses available to Dr Murphy but would give the information to the board chairman. Mr Hynes said he discussed this matter with Mr McLoone. On June 6th he told the regional director she should give the information to Dr Murphy. She refused, and Mr Hynes asked her to take administrative leave.
On June 12th Mr McLoone had concluded in a report that there was a failure to address, manage and lead the process of the recommended organisation change and it was clear the chairman blamed this "so-called failure" on Mr Hynes.
He had had no opportunity to respond to "an unsubtle attempt to attack my performance". After a further board meeting, to which he was not invited, he was told the chairman was recommending his suspension.
