A farmer ordered by the Department of Agriculture to destroy his 4,000-strong pig herd has had his court convictions formally struck out.

An appeal by Tom Galvin of Ballinamuck, Dungarvan, Co Waterford against more than 20 convictions relating to possession of a prohibited substance was successful at Clonmel Circuit Court recently after the department failed to enter evidence in the case.

Galvin, who protested his innocence throughout, was found guilty in November 2006 following the seizure by officials from the Department's special investigations unit (SIU) of a cancer-causing substance, Carbadox, during a search of his farm in April 2002. He was given a five-year suspended jail sentence and a €15,200 fine.

The Veterinary Council's fitness-to-practise committee is due to commence a full-scale investigation next month into the controversial slaughter of Galvin's 4,000 -strong herd of pigs on his farm on foot of an order by the department.

A report on the slaughter, written by Professor Kevin Dodd of UCD, who was the government's adviser in the foot-and-mouth emergency, described it as "an abject, despicable and wretched dereliction of common humanity, statutory duty and professional ethics by the veterinary surgeons who oversaw the killing of the pigs".

The cull, conducted under the department's supervision, was videotaped and the video given to then minister for agriculture Mary Coughlan, but no action was taken.

The slaughter was carried out by Galvin while standing in the midst of his pigs and randomly firing a captive bolt pistol. A hammer was also used to stun some of the animals with blows to their heads. Some pigs were still struggling in the truck as the carcasses were being removed from the farm.

The Veterinary Council decided to pursue a full-scale inquiry into the slaughter after conducting preliminary inquiries late last year, prompted by a formal complaint relating to four Department vets.

The council's fitness-to-practise committee has the same statutory powers of investigation and sanction as its counterpart committee in the Medical Council, under the control of the High Court. The council has the power to erase a practitioner's name from the profession's registrar and has the discretion to hold its inquiry in public.