The Director of Corporate Enforcement, Mr Paul Appleby, is targeting businessman Mr John Mulhern for breaches of company law because of his high profile, Mr Mulhern's counsel claimed at Kildare District Court yesterday. Mr Mulhern is the son-in-law of former Taoiseach Mr Charles Haughey.

The court was also told by Mr Mulhern's counsel that he would be contending that Mr Mulhern had been unlawfully arrested and detained at the Bridewell Garda Station during the investigation. The court heard Mr Mulhern's family home was also searched.

The defence said it would claim these warrants were unconstitutional.

In court, it was alleged that this prosecution had stemmed from a newspaper article in The Irish Times on June 23rd, 2003, which reported on the alleged offences. The defence said Mr Mulhern was the only person prosecuted out of a total of 500 such cases because of his "newsworthyness". It said the offences were at the lower end of the scale.

Mr Mulhern, Meadowcourt Stud, Maddenstown, Co Kildare has been charged with six breaches of Section 31 of the Companies Act 1990, which sets out the law in relation to directors borrowing money from their own companies.

It is alleged that Mr Mulhern received three loans from a company called Clayton Love Distribution Ltd (now known as Clalo Ltd), of which he was a director and an officer.

It is claimed that on March 6th, 2002, Mr Mulhern got a loan of €50,000, on April 2nd of the same year he borrowed €28,140 and on July 30th 2002 he received €8,226.

Judge Murrough Connellan told the court that the Director of Corporate Affairs was entitled to choose any "reasonable number of people to prosecute".

"On the information before the court, it would appear that the prosecution of the accused represents one third of 1 per cent, if those figures are correct," he said.

Judge Connellan said he believed that the accused and the court were entitled to an explanation to reassure all parties and the public that there was no discrimination in operation against any individual.

He said he believed it was a selective process and maybe an "intimidatory prosecution" on the face of it. He added these matters should be dealt with before going into the finer points of prosecution.

He said all the facts should be given and all matters vented before the court.

He ordered disclosure of the copies of all documents relating to the director's criteria for prosecution and the application of those criteria.

Ms Anne Keating, solicitor for the Director of Corporate Affairs, said her counsel had been held up in the High Court. She asked for the additional issues to be put back to be dealt with by him.

The defence said it was anxious not to have anything done in the prosecution's counsel's absence.

Judge Connellan adjourned matters until March 10th.